USTAMid-Atlantic Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
541472806
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Arlington, VA, USA
Phone
7035566120
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Racquet Sports

Reported finances

Revenue
$9,170,078
Expenses
$9,718,292
Assets
$13,661,778
Liabilities
$5,803,938

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Tynika Wilson (President)
  • Doug Bond (Vice-President)
  • Joan Ray (Vice President of Development)
  • Tara Fitzpatrick-Navarro (Chief Executive Officer)

Highest reported compensation

  • Tara Fitzpatrick-Navarro (Chief Executive Officer): $446,163 total reported compensation
  • Elizabeth W Twomey (Chief Operating Officer): $243,823 total reported compensation
  • Michelle G Wood (Sr. Director of Programs & Services): $154,194 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The USTA Mid-Atlantic Foundation champions tennis for healthier lives and communities, making the sport accessible to all in the Mid-Atlantic.

What it reported doing in 2025

Tennis Programs & Service InitiativesUSTA Mid-Atlantic Foundation offers quality recreational and competitive programs for people of all ages and abilities. Adult programs include USTA Leagues, Flex Leagues, social tennis, tournaments, Tennis on Campus, and diversity & inclusion initiatives. Youth programs feature school tennis, Junior Team Tennis, player development, and junior competition.See Schedule O for more information on Tennis Programs & Service Initiatives.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 61% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 99% 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 75
  • Transparency & Controls: 85
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 26
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 83.8%; rating input score 84
  • Program expense ratio: 78.8%; rating input score 79
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5.35 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 79.4%; rating input score 79; 27th 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: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -6%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.41; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.42; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 11.5%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 15.7% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 16.4% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 18.1% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 83.8% of revenue deployed · 78.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $7.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $446K · 15 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $868K reported
  • Consistency: 38 of 39 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2011 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 9 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 4 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 16/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 14/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 46/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 19/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 29/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.