Pella Soccer Club

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
201100711
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
Knoxville, IA, USA
Phone
6416281111
Rating
89
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Services

Reported finances

Revenue
$118,334
Expenses
$123,867
Assets
$69,850

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JASON HARTSON (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • CRAIG WRIGHT (AT-LARGE)
  • JASON HARTSON (PRESIDENT)
  • BECKY VAN HOUWELING (REG/DIR OF C)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The pella soccer club is a non-profit organization dedicated to providing competitive organized soccer for pella area youth with u-5 (under age 5) thru u-19 (under age 19) teams.

What it reported doing in 2025

1) to provide the administrative structure to coordinate teams and coaching, scheduling games, and provide referees and equipment. 2) the pella soccer club (psc) raises funds and dedicates time and effort to support the club and purchase equipment as needed. Psc pays a fee per participant to the city of pella to lease and maintain the pella soccer complex. 3) to offer soccer leagues in the fall and spring seasons, as well as a fall kickoff camp and an indoor winter academy.

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 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. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 100
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 23
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -4.7%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.56; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 22.3%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.8% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.6% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2% per year; rating input score 100; 32nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $124K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 20/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 41/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 16/100.