Sertoma Inc 10626 Summerville Sertoma Club
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 237352515
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2016–2017
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2017
- Location
- Summerville, SC, USA
- Phone
- 8434807991
- Rating
- 78
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Community Service Clubs
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $104,444
- Expenses
- $88,326
- Assets
- $51,491
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
3 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Kevin Betzold (President)
People named in this filing
- Kevin Betzold (President)
- Nazareth Ridley (Secretary)
- James E Jurey (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 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Summerville Sertoma Club uses its football and cheer programs to generate revenue to primarily assist children with hearing disabilities and other communicative disorders, as well as underprivileged children in the Tri-County Area.
What it reported doing in 2017
Summerville sertoma youth football league assists approximately 1200 children each year in the tri-county area. Our cheer program assists approximately 150 additional students. We provide leadership and fellowship with our children and adult role models for the children.our program provides structured activities for the children for 5 months during the year.
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
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 93% 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 - 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 the available information about grant readiness automatic revocation leaves an important question unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 76
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 54
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 70.6%; rating input score 71
- Program expense ratio: 83.5%; rating input score 83
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 15.4%; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.58; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 33.9% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 12.6% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 37.1% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 70.6% of revenue deployed · 83.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $74K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
- Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 2 filing years from 2016 to 2017
- 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.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 44/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.