San Diego Rugby Alumni Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
842083463
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2023, Form 990-N 2021
Location
San Diego, CA, USA
Phone
8587624630
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Amateur Sports

Reported finances

Revenue
$164,638
Expenses
$69,490
Assets
$276,959
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

1 person listed

People named in this filing

  • GREGORY HERRMAN (GREGORY HERR)

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

This association is a nonprofit public benefit corporation and is not organized for the private gain of any person. It is organized under the nonprofit public benefit corporation law for charitable purposes. The purposes for which this association is formed are exclusively charitable within the meaning of section 501(c)(3) of the internal revenue code. The general purpose of the association is to raise funds to promote youth, collegiate, and adult amateur and recreational rugby football programs in the san diego county area at the local, regional, and national levels; with a primary an initial focus on the university of san diego (usd and the university) collegiate rugby football program (the "usdrfc")and youth rugby programs in the san diego area.

What it reported doing in 2024

Support of youth rugby

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 94% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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: 59
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 84
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 45.9%; rating input score 46
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • 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: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 57.8%; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.99; rating input score 75; 75th 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: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 23.4% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 51.8% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 45.9% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $69K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 1 people listed
  • Consistency: 12 of 12 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 46/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • Review — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization could not be resolved against the register, so the check is unfinished.