Sportreach International

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
208653792
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2009–2010
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2010
Location
Woodland Park, CO, USA
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Recreational l Clubs
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$94,442
Expenses
$62,200
Assets
$35,762

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2010. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2010. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To extend the reach of churches and like-minded ministries worldwide with the message of jesus christ through the common language of sports.

What it reported doing in 2010

In the fiscal year 2010-2011, sportreach international continued to function as the sports ministry division of e3 partners ministry. Sportreach personnel led or participated in 7 mission trips to 6 countries which included china, india, kenya, peru, costa rica and thailand. All of these trips were focused on training and developing leaders for evangelizing, discipling and church planting within their cultures, within their countries. Over 170 nationals were trained and 38 churches planted with the hopes that all of them will multiply and contribute to a church expansion movement that will spread throughout their countries without any american intervention within 3 - 5 years.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 89% 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 program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 59
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 51
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 49.7%; rating input score 50
  • Program expense ratio: 75.4%; rating input score 75

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 34.1%; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.57; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: Limited

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 96% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 75.9% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 68.1% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 49.7% of revenue deployed · 75.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $47K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2009 to 2010
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 50/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 35/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.