Scholastic Shooting Sports Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
208484121
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2007
Location
San Antonio, TX, USA
Phone
3175577861
Rating
88
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Amateur Sports

Reported finances

Revenue
$5,815,520
Expenses
$5,306,387
Assets
$5,779,946
Liabilities
$1,530,549

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Richard Leach (President and Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Brad Fleury (Director of Operations): $162,814 total reported compensation
  • Richard Leach (President and Executive Director): $130,665 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To provide shooting-sports education and opportunities to school-age youths around the United States to encourage young athlete personal growth and development.

What it reported doing in 2024

The Scholastic Shooting Sports Foundation SSSF provides youth development through the shooting sports. SSSF manages clay target and action shooting youth development programs in which adult coaches and other volunteers use shooting sports to teach and demonstrate sportsmanship responsibility honesty ethics integrity teamwork and other positive life skills. Athletes compete in team-based shooting sports where there is no such thing as being benched offering a truly level playing field to all.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 68% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 91
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 50
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 87.8%; rating input score 88
  • Program expense ratio: 96.2%; rating input score 96
  • Fundraising efficiency: $129.56 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 8.8%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.09; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.26; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.5%; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.1% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.6% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 15.5% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 87.8% of revenue deployed · 96.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $5.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $163K · 13 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 44 of 47 current checks pass · 3 findings to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 filed related-organization links
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Document-retention policy not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 40/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 37/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX CompCurrentOfficersDirectors column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 50/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.