USA National Karatedo Federation Of

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
542000376
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2014
Forms available
Form 990 2014
Location
Virginia Beach, VA, USA
Rating
57
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Amateur Sports

Reported finances

Revenue
$273,481
Expenses
$326,544
Assets
$360,725
Liabilities
$510,049

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ERNEST M DENNIS (PRESIDENT)
  • DANIEL J MONTGOMERY (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • SHAREON C GUIDO (TREASURER): $31,999 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To teach respect, discplile for for others and self defencse to adults and children who could not otherwise afford it. Conduct touraments, seminars, and training in traditional martial arts.

What it reported doing in 2014

The organization has filed adminstrative greivances under usoc guidlines as well as lawsuits to proctrect the rights and privledges of the martial arts athletes, coaches, and officials.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 83% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 46% for direct work, and 54% for grants.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 28
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 24
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 33.6%; rating input score 34
  • Program expense ratio: 28.2%; rating input score 28
  • 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: 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: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -19.4%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.1; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.41; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9.8%; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 33.6% of revenue deployed · 28.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $92K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $32K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 22 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 34/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 28/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 13/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 46/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 4/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 35/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.