SOCAL Water Polo
Legal name: Socal Water Polo Foundation Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 330869141
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2011–2025
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Tustin, California, USA
- Phone
- 7147305397
- Rating
- 79
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Swimming & Other Water Recreation
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,325,495
- Expenses
- $1,359,795
- Assets
- $108,505
- Liabilities
- $87,382
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
6 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- ANDREW ROWE (PRESIDENT)
- F EDWARD REYNOLDS JR (VICE PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- ANDREW ROWE (PRESIDENT): $86,400 total reported compensation
- WILLIAM PEVEHOUSE (SEC/TREAS): $23,792 total reported compensation
- F EDWARD REYNOLDS JR (VICE PRESIDENT): $2,000 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
We create scholar athletes that excel in the pool, in the classroom, in their communities and in their families.
What it reported doing in 2025
Socal water polo (socal) is a tustin based non-profit that was founded in 1987 to develop the water polo skills of young athletes. Socal creates scholar athletes that excel in the pool, in the classroom, their communities and in their families. Over the last 20 years socal has emerged as a powerhouse club. We offer programs for boys and girls from ages 5 and up. Socal has over 400 athletes many of whom have gone on to be ncaa athletes and olympians. To date socal athletes have earned over $10,000,000 in college scholarships.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 99% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 99% 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. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 87
- Transparency & Controls: 79
- Accountability: 72
- Sustainability: 19
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 99.1%; rating input score 99
- Program expense ratio: 96.6%; rating input score 97
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 1st 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: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 17th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -2.6%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.08; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.81; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 8.3%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 5.9% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 5.2% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 6.2% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 8 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 99.1% of revenue deployed · 96.6% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 4 of 6 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.3M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $86K · 6 people listed
- Consistency: 24 of 25 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 3 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.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 24/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 5/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 7/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 42/100.