Scufc Development Academy Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
264596129
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2016, Form 990-EZ 2012
Location
Mt Pleasant, SC, USA
Phone
8432700596
Rating
54
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Elementary, Secondary Education, K - 12

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$8,502
Expenses
$112,923
Assets
$500
Liabilities
$1,974

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOE MACHNIK (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • CLARK BRISSON (EXECUTIVE DI): $34,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Uniforms, coaching, training, and travel for boys to participate in us soccer developmental academy for boys in under 14, under 16 and under 18 divisions.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 62
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 12
  • Sustainability: 4
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 18.4%; rating input score 18
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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: Limited
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -1,228.2%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 3.95; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 30.1%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -40.4% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -6.5% per year; rating input score 0; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1.6% per year; rating input score 0; 41st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 18.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $21K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $34K · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 16 of 16 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2013 to 2016
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 18/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 4/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 4/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 11/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.