Southern California Rugby Referees Society

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
820594453
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2019–2019
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2019
Location
Nipomo, CA, USA
Phone
8054594267
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Adult, Continuing Education

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$48,741
Expenses
$44,610
Assets
$13,309
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2019. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Nicholas Ricono (President and Director)
  • Marquise Goodwin (Vice-President and Director)

People named in this filing

  • Nicholas Ricono (President and Director)
  • Marquise Goodwin (Vice-President and Director)
  • Neville Smeda (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 2019. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Provide referee services for sanctioned rugby matches played within the Southern California region.

What it reported doing in 2019

We provided match officials at over 400 rugby matches during the reporting year, that spanned across the high school, college, and elite divisions. Providing referee services allows for thousands of players to play the game they love, and keeps children, college students, and adults engaged in positive activities. We also provided training to over 50 referees during the reporting period, which helps them improve their officiating skills, resulting in a higher standard of officiating at all rugby events.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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

STRONG - 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 reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 95
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 49
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 91.5%; rating input score 92
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 8.5%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.3; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 91.5% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $45K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • 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.

  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 20/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.