Palo Verde Lacrosse Club
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 300001810
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2011–2015
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2015, Form 990-N 2010
- Location
- Las Vegas, NV, USA
- Phone
- 7022775874
- Rating
- 85
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Amateur Sports
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $157,817
- Expenses
- $124,916
- Assets
- $95,337
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
11 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Mark Lovejoy (Past President)
- Ed Dolegowski (President)
- Kevin Marsh (Vice President)
People named in this filing
- Mark Lovejoy (Past President)
- Ed Dolegowski (President)
- Kelly Marsh (Secretary)
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
The primary purpose of the Palo Verde Lacrosse Club shall be to support and unite local teams, and promote the game of lacrosse by conducting amateur lacrosse competition primarily for boys and girls of Palo Verde High School, Clark County, Nevada as well as for all affiliated middle school lacrosse programs. The goals/objectives of the Club are to: 1) foster teamwork, 2) develop player's physical capabilities and well being, and 3) develop player's sportsmanship, leadership, character and integrity.
What it reported doing in 2015
The Club fielded at total of 8 teams (4 middle school and 4 high school) during the 2015 tax year that provided physical training, coaching and organized league play and tournament travel experiences. Through the Club's lacrosse program, a total of 201 players ranging from 4th through 12th grade benefited from the Club's only program service.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 81% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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. Total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown and the available information about grant readiness automatic revocation leaves an important question unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 87
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 71
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 79.2%; rating input score 79
- 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: 20.8%; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.76; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 18.9% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 19.8% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 32.7% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 79.2% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $125K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 11 people listed
- Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 5 filing years from 2011 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.
Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 55/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.