Silver Lakes Gymnastics a California Benefit Corporation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 010946196
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2024–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2023, Form 990-N 2016
- Location
- Apple Valley, CA, USA
- Phone
- 7609850341
- Rating
- 48
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Recreation& Sports N.E.C.
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $327,595
- Expenses
- $177,851
- Assets
- $0
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
3 people listed
Highest reported compensation
- BEATRICE SOUTH (DIRECTOR): $12,000 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
This nbsp; organization nbsp; provides nbsp; gymnastics nbsp; classes nbsp; in nbsp; a nbsp; rural nbsp; area nbsp; of nbsp; southern nbsp; California nbsp; known nbsp; as nbsp; the nbsp; high nbsp; desert nbsp; it nbsp; engage nbsp; students nbsp; in nbsp; physical nbsp; activity nbsp; to nbsp; develop nbsp; their nbsp; interest nbsp; in nbsp; the nbsp; sport nbsp; of nbsp; gymnastics nbsp; some nbsp; of nbsp; the nbsp; students nbsp; attending nbsp; go nbsp; on nbsp; to nbsp; compete nbsp; in nbsp; a nbsp; local nbsp; regional nbsp; state nbsp; and nbsp; national nbsp; level nbsp; competitions nbsp; sponsored nbsp; by nbsp; the nbsp; gymnastics nbsp; national nbsp; organization nbsp; this nbsp; organization nbsp; sponsors nbsp; students nbsp; at nbsp; various nbsp; levels nbsp; who nbsp; would nbsp; not nbsp; be nbsp; able nbsp; to nbsp; afford nbsp; the nbsp; instruction nbsp; costs nbsp; as nbsp; well nbsp; as nbsp; the nbsp; competition nbsp; costs
What it reported doing in 2025
Paid the gymnastics coaching meet fees training shorts and competition leos for 16 kids
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Membership-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
- 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.
The verdict
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 31
- Transparency & Controls: 88
- Accountability: 10
- Sustainability: 46
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 26.4%; rating input score 26
- Program expense ratio: 48.6%; rating input score 49
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 4th 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: 0%; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: Missing
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 45.7%; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 6.7%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 37.2% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 11.3% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 2.6% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 26.4% of revenue deployed · 48.6% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 0 of 3 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $35K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $12K · 3 people listed
- Consistency: 12 of 14 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 2 filing years from 2024 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 26/100.
- High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 49/100.
- High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX ConferencesMeetings column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 29/100.
- Review — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization could not be resolved against the register, so the check is unfinished.