Springwood Swim Club

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
941688536
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2023
Location
Concord, CA, USA
Phone
9257983493
Rating
56
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$333,385
Expenses
$65,143
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Marco Ramos (Vice President)
  • Herb Bell (President)

People named in this filing

  • Marco Ramos (Vice President)
  • Herb Bell (President)
  • Dawn Duke (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. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Swim club - neighborhood recreational swimming facilitiesswim team - competitive swimming program for youth

What it reported doing in 2024

Swim club - neighborhood recreational swimming facilities

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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 revenue has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 38
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 58
  • Sustainability: 55
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 17%; rating input score 17
  • Program expense ratio: 86.8%; rating input score 87
  • 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 0 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 80.5%; rating input score 98; 98th 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: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 4.3% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.2% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 17% of revenue deployed · 86.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 0 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $57K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 14 of 15 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 1 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 17/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.