Performance Volleyball Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
472357532
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2015–2016
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2016, Form 990-N 2014
Location
Wilmington, NC, USA
Phone
9105122744
Rating
88
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Amateur Sports

Reported finances

Revenue
$91,567
Expenses
$94,746
Assets
$6,333

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • STEPHEN MCKEON (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • STEPHEN MCKEON (PRESIDENT)
  • RODNEY MORGAN (VICE PRESIDE)
  • JIM ROSS (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 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To offer the best in beach volleyball training and knowledge to the youth players in wilmington and surronding areas

What it reported doing in 2016

Nc coastal volleyball club has the objective creating a competitive, fun and positive learning environment for participants. We strive to provide young athletes with affordable opportunities to enjoy and grow in the sport of volleyball. Emphasis is placed on the development of volleyball skills, participation, sportsmanship and enjoying the game. Nc coastal volleyball club offers programs for a variety of ages.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 97% 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: 27
  • Growth: 80

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; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -3.5%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.07; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 50.6% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 33.9% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -40.1% per year; rating input score 0; 6th 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 · $95K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2015 to 2016
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 38/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 8/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.