Rachel Gamble Memorial Fund
Legal name: Rachel Gamble Memorial Scholarship Fund
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 830525081
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2018–2025
- Official website data refreshed
- Aug 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025
- Location
- Chattanooga, TN, USA
- Phone
- 4233138770
- Rating
- 47
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Scholarships, Student Financial Aid Services, Awards
- Affiliation
- Christianity
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $80,058
- Expenses
- $21,351
- Assets
- $420,315
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
3 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JOHN MICHAEL GAMBLE (PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- JOHN MICHAEL GAMBLE (PRESIDENT)
- SUSAN P GAMBLE (SECRETARY/TREASURER)
- ROBYN CARTER (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
To provide college scholarships for graduating student-athletes at East Hamilton High School who share Rachel's spirit, character, and heart for others, and to sponsor student-athletes for FCA Camps, local FCA Huddle Groups, youth mission trips, and care for the Chattanooga homeless community.
What it reported doing in 2025
Fellowship of christian athletes , chattanooga & north ga chapters. Sponsorship of fca camp & huddle groups
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
The verdict
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. 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: 88
- 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; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 73.3%; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 19.69; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: 0.8% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 22.3% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 5 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 4 filed program accomplishments
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules
- Filing history: 7 filing years from 2018 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.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.