Tennessee Tennis Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
620992696
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2007
Location
Nashville, TN, USA
Phone
6159531694
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,332,040
Expenses
$2,181,359
Assets
$1,798,359
Liabilities
$82,914

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Michael Chamberlain (Executive Director)
  • CAROL WINN (PRESIDENT)
  • JACK HU (PRESIDENT ELECT)

Highest reported compensation

  • Michael Chamberlain (Executive Director): $176,997 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Grow and Develop Tennis in Tennessee.

What it reported doing in 2025

Adult league tennis - in league tennis, members form teams and play other teams in their local community league; the winning teams advance to the state championship level and play other teams during 3-day tournaments. The winning teams from the state level advance to the sectional championships (nine states comprise the southern tennis association section); winning sectional teams advance to the national championships. Adult league tennis is the single most popular program we offer. During 2025, we offered seven different adult tennis leagues and resulting championships: 18 & over adult league, 40 & over adult league, 55 & over adult league, 65 & over adult league, mixed doubles league, tri-level league, and combo doubles league. Player participation for all seven leagues totalled over 25,000 in 2025.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 65% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 98% 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 most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 76
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 42
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 83.5%; rating input score 83
  • Program expense ratio: 89.1%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • 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: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 6.5%; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.82; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8.1%; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.5% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.4% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.5% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 83.5% of revenue deployed · 89.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $1.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $177K · 15 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2011 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 47/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 28/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 40/100.