The DuPage Figure Skating Club

Legal name: The Dupage Figure Skating Club Co Cathy Bushman

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
363010491
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
North Aurora, IL, USA
Phone
6303625451
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Religion Related N.E.C.
Affiliation
Religious (unspecified)

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$68,149
Expenses
$83,678
Assets
$605,763
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Jan Serafine (President)

People named in this filing

  • Jan Serafine (President)
  • Monica Decker (1st Vice Pres)
  • Dr Betty Schilke (2nd Vice Pres)

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

The club organizes and provides skating facilities and equipment for the pleasure and recreation of its members. A program created for those who are fans of the sport and our very own DuPage FSC and wish to contribute to its continued success. Often you may know of friends, relatives, former skaters, and club members who want to contribute directly to the ongoing progrmas of our club, but yet, do not need a full USFS membership. The "Friends of DuPage" is a perfect outlet for this purpose. Funds raised help promote and support member skaters, and each level allows for benefits, all of which including keeping abreast of our club and skaters via our Newsletter. All donations are tax deductible. A program created for those who are fans of the sport and our very own DuPage FSC and wish to contribute to its.

What it reported doing in 2024

The club organized and provided skating faciliites and equipment for the pleasure and recreation of its members.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 65% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 65% for direct work, and 35% for grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 78
  • Transparency & Controls: 93
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 50
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 87%; rating input score 87
  • Program expense ratio: 90.3%; rating input score 90
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -22.8%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 7.24; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.4% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -2.1% per year; rating input score 0; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.2% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: Mission, programs, and operating context captured from the official website.
  • Where the money goes: 87% of revenue deployed · 90.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $76K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 17 of 17 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 38/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 56/100.