Thrust Athletic Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
471971962
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2016–2020
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2020, Form 990-N 2015
Location
Nyack, NY, USA
Phone
9173715603
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Sports Associations &Training Facilities

Reported finances

Revenue
$10,000
Expenses
$19,802
Assets
$867
Liabilities
$9,330

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

People named in this filing

  • MIKAIL SANKOFA (CHAIR)
  • RONALD MCGRATH (BOARD MEMBER)
  • ED RABOWSKY (BOARD MEMBER)

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 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The purpose of the foundation is to help the community by exposing youth to the olympic sport of fencing and the importance of higher education. The foundation will provide programs for participants after school and on the weekends from september through june to facilitate these goals. The foundation's programs intend to provide a positive environment for improving academics through tutorial assistance, excercising and learning the skill of fencing by offering scholarships for training and traveling under the guidance of an olympian to members of the rockland and westchester county communities

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 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: 100
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 15
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -98%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.04; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 10.76; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -21.4% per year; rating input score 0; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -24.2% per year; rating input score 0; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -27.3% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $20K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2016 to 2020
  • 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 13/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 6/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 1/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.