Russell Youth Basketball League Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
863699092
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2021–2021
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2021
Location
Russell, KY, USA
Phone
6065711683
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$13,342
Expenses
$7,963
Assets
$5,379

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Richard Blum (President)
  • Nicholas Lewis (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Richard Blum (President)
  • Nicholas Lewis (Vice President)
  • Derrick Fleming (Treasurer)

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

The mission is to oversee, maintain, supervise, direct or otherwise control a youth league of basketball players and teams, grades K -8, to conduct games between teams participating in the league and sponsor or promote games between Russell Youth Basketball League Inc teams or other teams. To conduct activities to raise funds for the league, including the sale of concessions. To allow the formation of cheerleading squads in conjunction with the league teams.

What it reported doing in 2021

During the period reported, the league served 4 divisions of basketball teams, each division having 6 teams making a total of 24 teams of players. Each of the teams had 10 players totaling 240 school children in grades K-8 benefiting from the league. The students are participating in an activity that provides physical activity to promote health, learning team sportsmanship and cooperation with one another, learning to follow the direction of their coach which will promote good life skills as they mature.

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 62% for direct work, and 38% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 75
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 54
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 59.7%; rating input score 60
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 40.3%; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.68; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 59.7% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $8K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 30/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.