Polish American Social Club of Pasco Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 237349518
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2016–2016
- Official website data refreshed
- Jul 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2016
- Location
- Hudson, FL, USA
- Rating
- 52
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Recreational l Clubs
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $69,458
- Expenses
- $68,516
- Assets
- $38,598
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
4 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- RICHARD NICHOLS (PRESIDENT AN)
People named in this filing
- RICHARD NICHOLS (PRESIDENT AN)
- MARY LOU KOLACKOVSKY (VICE PRESDIE)
- MICHAEL KOZMINSKE (2ND VICE PRE)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Mission is to create a venue where seniors can socialize and interact through dinners and dances.
What it reported doing in 2016
Various dinner and dances and special events were held that accomplished our mission of promoting social interaction among the elderly.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 71% 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
MIXED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 61
- Transparency & Controls: 80
- Accountability: 6
- Sustainability: 49
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 67.6%; rating input score 68
- Program expense ratio: 68.6%; rating input score 69
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 6th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 1.4%; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.56; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 67.6% of revenue deployed · 68.6% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 0 of 4 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
- Consistency: 16 of 17 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
- High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D land buildings reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 18/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 59/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.