United States Polo Association

Legal name: United States Polo Association Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
363016024
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Lake Worth, FL, United States
Phone
800-232-8772
Rating confidence
Limited

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$59,366,175
Expenses
$32,094,679
Assets
$358,927,549
Liabilities
$72,004,436

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

Leadership & pay

41 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CHARLES SMITH (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • CHRIS GREEN (COO & GENERAL COUNSEL): $559,654 total reported compensation
  • SUSAN C PRESENT (CFO): $324,734 total reported compensation
  • FERGUS GOULD (EXEC. DIR.- UMPIRES LLC): $293,792 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of the Team USPA Committee is to improve the sport of polo in the United States by developing the talent/skills of young American players through mentored training and playing opportunities, ultimately leading to a pool of higher rated American players.

What it reported doing in 2024

Polo umpire program- the umpires llc program is dedicated to supporting all aspects of umpire services and programs within the united states polo association ("uspa"). This includes the training and certification of all umpires, ensuring consistent and accurate rules interpretation on the field. The program also focuses on educating players regarding the rules and any updates to them, as well as providing support to professional umpires. The umpires llc aspires to create a safe, rules-driven environment at every club it serves, with the goals of achieving respect for the game and treating all participants fairly.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 71% of the money available for current operations came from other operating 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

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 76
  • Accountability: 72
  • Sustainability: 81
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Pass
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 98.2%; rating input score 98; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 70.4%; rating input score 70; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 45.9%; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 11.18; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.2; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.1%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 8.6% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 14.1% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 11 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 19 of 27 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $560K · 41 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.9M reported
  • Consistency: 15 of 16 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes foreign activity, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 115 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 104 filed related-organization links
  • 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: Foreign activity oversight: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.