SV Athletic Association Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 463339880
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2013–2015
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2015
- Location
- Scotts Valley, CA, USA
- Phone
- 8315157046
- Rating
- 82
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Sports Associations &Training Facilities
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $19,172
- Expenses
- $22,314
- Assets
- $8,746
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
10 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Michael Bradley (President)
- Kevin Nice Sr (Vice President)
- Steve Walpole (President)
- Larry Brown (Vice President)
People named in this filing
- Michael Bradley (President)
- Kevin Nice Sr (Vice President)
- Shara Sheard (Secretary)
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 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Scotts Valley Athletics Association mission is to provide the youth of Santa Cruz County a football and cheer program that offers a safe and fun environment, where children can learn the skills of the sport, along with the important values of teamwork, sportsmanship, self esteem and discipline. We believe these are all vital aspects of developing well-rounded athletes and forming good citizens within our community.
What it reported doing in 2015
Scotts Valley Athletic Association provided leadership and financial support for youth football and cheer teams during the 2015 playing season. Over 175 children were able to participate in the communities football and cheer league.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
- 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. Expenses are high relative to revenue and program spending has declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 94
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 25
- Growth: 20
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 98.8%; rating input score 99
- Program expense ratio: 84.9%; rating input score 85
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -16.4%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.39; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -22.7% per year; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -17.5% per year; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 4.2% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 98.8% of revenue deployed · 84.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $19K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
- Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 3 filing years from 2013 to 2015
- 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: Operating margin scored 24/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 25/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.
- Review — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization could not be resolved against the register, so the check is unfinished.