USA Weightlifting Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
311012362
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Colorado Springs, CO, USA
Phone
7198664508
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$7,424,914
Expenses
$7,168,033
Assets
$4,294,113
Liabilities
$1,908,141

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MATTHEW SICCHIO (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • MATTHEW SICCHIO (CEO): $318,216 total reported compensation
  • MICHAEL GATTONE (DIRECTOR OF SPORTS PERFORM): $168,444 total reported compensation
  • JOHN NICOLETTA (COO): $129,563 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 USA weightlifting shall be to support united states athletes in achieving excellence in olympic and world competition and to support, promote, and educate a diverse and inclusive community of weightlifting and the use of the barbell in the united states.

What it reported doing in 2024

Membership services usaw provided competition opportunities at a grassroots level to member athletes, providing participant accident insurance and general liability insurance. Maintains an online database for event registration, trainings, certifications and athlete competition history, maintains an extensive webiste to communicate program details, current rankings and calendar of events. Supports twenty-six local committees to support grassroots programs

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 80% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 85% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 85
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 86
  • Sustainability: 34
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 82.9%; rating input score 83
  • Program expense ratio: 84.5%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: $344.13 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: 78.1%; rating input score 78; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: 3.5%; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.6; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.44; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.3%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.1% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.9% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.8% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 82.9% of revenue deployed · 84.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $6.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $318K · 16 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 37 of 39 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 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.

Key Signals

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

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 46/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 22/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 24/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 29/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.