Skate Journeys

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
264061263
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2022
Location
Seattle, WA, USA
Phone
2062769328
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Winter Sports

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$340,176
Expenses
$348,438
Assets
$32,621
Liabilities
$8,056

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Patricia Alexander (Executive Director)
  • Karina Miller (President)
  • Brian Long (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Patricia Alexander (Executive Director): $67,516 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 teach and transform lives through inline and roller skating.

What it reported doing in 2024

Community: Community: Skate Journeys provided community classes year-round for 300 kids and adults to learn to skate on roller and inline skates. Students took a total of 1556 classes. Advanced classes included artistic, slalom and trail classes. A six-week apprentice instructor training course was provided for 16 students. We offered 6 free days of classes to the community for an average of 28 students per day. Students were able to enroll in multiple classes occurring on the same day. Fee waivers for 6 individuals were provided for low-income students totaling $615. In the context of "Safety Fun and Learning" the objective for our community classes is to provide healthy activity for families and fellowship among skaters. The focus includes: 1. Learning basic skating skills 2. Progressing beyond the basics in a variety of skating disciplines 3. Service to others.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 65% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 98% 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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 50
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 22
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 51%; rating input score 51
  • Program expense ratio: 49.8%; rating input score 50
  • Fundraising efficiency: $11.98 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings

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: 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: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -2.4%; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.09; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.25; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 19.4%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.9% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.7% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -10.2% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 8 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 4 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 51% of revenue deployed · 49.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $173K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $68K · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 22 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2023 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 51/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 50/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 44/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 34/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 6/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 18/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 20/100.