Valley of the Sun Hockey Association Ii

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
860804141
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Phoenix, AZ, USA
Phone
4802273132
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Youth Development N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$764,081
Expenses
$668,096
Assets
$320,049
Liabilities
$7,475

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Mark Pragliola (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Justin Rogers (Coach in Chief): $62,834 total reported compensation
  • Stephen Majercak (Voting Director): $15,625 total reported compensation
  • Coleman Rice (Voting Director): $11,563 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Teach Ice Hockey skills to youth.

What it reported doing in 2024

As an organization we are dedicated to providing high-quality skill development in the sport of ice hockey for all players, within a safe, supportive, and inclusive environment. Our focus is on progressive skill-building and enthusiastic encouragement to ensure every player enjoys a positive and rewarding experience in the sport. Through structured training, education, and strong role modeling, we emphasize the core values of sportsmanship, teamwork, leadership, with family and community involvement. These principles guide all our activities and define our community culture. As an organization, we are committed to growing our capacity to deliver a robust and sustainable youth hockey program. Serving over 200 members, we aim to meet the evolving needs of our athletes while continually enhancing their skills, confidence, teamwork and leadership.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 96% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program 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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and some filed totals do not add up.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 83
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 48
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 87.3%; rating input score 87
  • Program expense ratio: 99.8%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 12th 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: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 12.6%; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.48; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 13.5%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.2% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.2% per year; rating input score 100; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.5% per year; rating input score 100; 45th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 87.3% of revenue deployed · 99.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $668K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $63K · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 18 of 20 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 22/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 27/100.