Pittsylvania Caswell Youth Livestock Association Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
582668746
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2021–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
Chatham, VA, USA
Phone
4344327770
Rating
46
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Youth Development - Agricultural

Reported finances

Revenue
$136,414
Expenses
$127,352
Assets
$90,735
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BEN KENDIG (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • JAY CALHOUN (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • WILLIAM VERNON (DIRECTOR)
  • STEPHANIE WEISS (DIRECTOR)
  • JOHN SATTERFIELD (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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The pittsylvania caswell youth livestock association is a support organization of the pittsylvania county, va and caswell county, nc 4-h and ffa members of the respective school systems and cooperative extension agencies. The pittsylvania caswell youth livestock association's purpose is providing additional livestock care instructions and support to 4-h and ffa members and organizing the youth livestock show and sale each year.

What it reported doing in 2025

Annual livestock show and sale for area youth ages 6-19. Approximately 111 youth show 176 animals including beef cattle, sheep, goats and hogs as 4-h and ffa projects sanctioned by the commonwealth of Virginia. The animals are sold at auction at the end of the show, if not taken to another show, and the youth invest the sales proceeds in new animal projects or educational funds.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 86% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
No current program activity. The filing reports no program spending for the current year.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 53
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 6.6%; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.71; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 19.5% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 19.7% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2021 to 2025
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 48/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 48/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.