Pvc Pumas Volleyball Club Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
813958720
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2017–2021
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2021
Location
North Andover, MA, USA
Phone
6172851362
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Amateur Sports

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$79,684
Expenses
$66,384
Assets
$31,521
Liabilities
$15,000

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2021. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • STEPHEN BOYLE (PRESIDENT/EX)

People named in this filing

  • STEPHEN BOYLE (PRESIDENT/EX)
  • STEPHEN BOYLE (TREASURER)
  • STEVEN BOYLE (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 2021. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To foster the development of athletic skill, knowledge, leadership, and sportsmanshipin local and national amateur youth volleyball competition. We strive to develop the athlete as a whole rather than focus on winning as the sole benchmark.

What it reported doing in 2021

Promoting the sport of volleyball to young female athletes in grades 4 through 12, through dedicated coaching and structured team experience composed of local weekly practices and turnaments held throughout new england and the eastern united states.

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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 79
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 44
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 73.3%; rating input score 73
  • Program expense ratio: 88%; rating input score 88

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 16.7%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.47; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.48; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -35.4% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -28% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.7% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 73.3% of revenue deployed · 88% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $58K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2017 to 2021
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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.

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 — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 23/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 9/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.