Peoria Diamond Club

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
860753703
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Peoria, AZ, USA
Phone
6237738710
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Professional Athletic Leagues

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$496,590
Expenses
$428,241
Assets
$619,521
Liabilities
$59,758

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ROY ROBERTS END 72025 (FORMER VICE PRESIDENT)
  • WARREN HUTSON (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • STEVE HARVEY (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • REBECCA WRIGHT (GENERAL MANAGER): $83,796 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The peoria diamond club is a non-profit organization dedicated to supporting community programs that educate and enrigh children's lives, while enhancing their futures. Through a partnership with the san diego padres, seattle mariners, and the city of (see schedule o) peoria, the organizations manages the operations of spring training and other events at the peoria sports complex which is owned by the city of peoria, az. Revenues generated through the events management, which includes partnerships, sponsorships, donations and other volunteer efforts, are then awarded to local organizations and peoria school district to benefit and support youth programs and for student scholarships through their grant program.

What it reported doing in 2025

Net income earned throughout the year is used to provide other organizations awards, contributions and grants to assist in providing programs for children and youth in developing educational, athletic, therapeutic and fine art goals through sponsored or directed activites and to defined projects that are within the pdc's mission and stated areas of interest. Community grants were made to over 40 organizations totaling $173,305. A grant and direct scholarships were paid to the peoria unifed school district high school and to individual students at the district totaling $10,600. The grant was for the emerging leaders program. Pdc also partnered with other local organizations to purchase supplies totaling $13,563 to resupply a peoria school.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 41% for direct work, and 59% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 65
  • Transparency & Controls: 76
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 49
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 68.1%; rating input score 68
  • Program expense ratio: 77.5%; rating input score 77
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4.21 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 46.4%; rating input score 46; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 13.8%; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.45; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.1; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 19.6%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.6% per year; rating input score 100; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.7% per year; rating input score 0; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.5% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 68.1% of revenue deployed · 77.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $332K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $84K · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2011 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 3 filed related-organization links
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 46/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 18/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 51/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 19/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 22/100.