Rotary International Vista Night

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
364073888
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2010–2014
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2014, Form 990-N 2007
Location
Columbia, SC, USA
Phone
8037650083
Rating
38
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community Service Clubs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$37,126
Expenses
$37,820
Assets
$20,142
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ROSS ANDREWS (PRESIDENT)
  • EDWARD WALLER (PAST PRESIDENT)
  • KATHLEEN MCDANIEL (PRESIDENT ELECT)

People named in this filing

  • ROSS ANDREWS (PRESIDENT)
  • EDWARD WALLER (PAST PRESIDENT)
  • KATHLEEN MCDANIEL (PRESIDENT ELECT)

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 2014. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The primary exempt purpose of the vista night rotary club is to support and promote the goals, objectives and principles of rotary international at the local level. The main objective of rotary is service--in the community, in the workplace, and throughout the world. Rotary volunteers build goodwill and peace, provide humanitarian service, and encourage high ethical standards in all vocations.

What it reported doing in 2014

The vista night rotary club supports the overall objectives ofrotary international and ri district 7770 through variouscoordinated programs, fundraising and local service efforts.rotary international-polio plustherapy placedictionary projectharvest hope food bankcart

Operating model

Revenue model
Membership-supported. 61% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
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

REVIEW - 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: 82
  • Sustainability: 44
  • 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: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -1.9%; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.53; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -200% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.1% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.5% per year; rating input score 100; 47th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2010 to 2014
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 40/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 32/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.