Rad Canyon Bmx Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
923130941
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Saratoga Springs, UT, USA
Phone
8018031900
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Amateur Sports

Reported finances

Revenue
$100,841
Expenses
$69,139
Assets
$168,252
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SHAUN COON (PRESIDENT)
  • ADAN PEME (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • KIM BRUNSON (SAFETYTRACK MAINTENANCE)
  • CAREN SPENCER (REGISTRATION COORDINATOR)
  • MASON VAN RENSELAAR (OFFICER)

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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Further the sport of bmx, and bicycling in Utah, by exposing as many individuals as possible to our events.

What it reported doing in 2024

Rad canyon bmx supports bicycling in Utah for all ages. In 2024, the track averaged around 110 racers each week from ages 2 to 70. Rad canyons bmx track has been one of the top ten tracks in the western u.s. For 29 years. It has been one of the top 20 tracks in the nation for 29 years. It has been ranked top track in the state for 28 years. Rad canyon has run entirely with volunteers for over twenty years.

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 - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 54
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 75
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 52.1%; rating input score 52
  • Program expense ratio: 76%; rating input score 76
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 31.4%; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.43; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -44.9% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -46.8% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 19.5% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 52.1% of revenue deployed · 76% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $53K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 13 of 13 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 52/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.