Mid Florida Tractor Pullers Assoc
Legal name: Ocala Tractor Pull Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 260297706
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2012–2015
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2015
- Location
- Ocala, Florida, United States
- Phone
- (352)427-3776
- Rating
- 83
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Fairs
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $68,244
- Expenses
- $59,541
- Assets
- $20,280
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
3 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- MICHAEL D LOKAI (PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- MICHAEL D LOKAI (PRESIDENT)
- ROBIN ANN LOKAI (SECRETARY/TR)
- SCOTT PHILLIPS (DIRECTOR)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To conduct tractor pull events and competitions to help fund and raise awareness related to agricultural and equine interests around the central Florida area.
What it reported doing in 2015
To conduct tractor pull events and competitions to help fund and raise awareness related to agricultural and equine interests around the central Florida area and provide assistance to other 501(c)(3) organizations.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 96% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Revenue has declined or grown slowly and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 92
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 45
- Growth: 40
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 87.2%; rating input score 87
- Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 12.8%; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.34; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 0.7% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -1.8% per year; rating input score 0; 48th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -16.5% per year; rating input score 0; 16th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 1 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 87.2% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $60K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
- Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
- Schedules: 1 filed schedules
- Filing history: 4 filing years from 2012 to 2015
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
- People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 23/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.