Vicis Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
814625741
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2017–2018
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2018
Location
Seattle, WA, USA
Phone
2064566680
Rating
61
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and Fund Distribution

Reported finances

Revenue
$107,648
Expenses
$143,126
Assets
$9,117
Liabilities
$56,036

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LISA ERTZ THRU 102018 (PRESIDENT)
  • GINA SWANSON (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • LISA ERTZ THRU 102018 (PRESIDENT)
  • GINA SWANSON (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • DAVID AUCKLAND (TREASURER)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The vicis foundation is a 501(c)(3) focused on improving safety for youth and high school athletes, regardless of background, ability or resources. Through grants to sports programs serving low-income and minority populations, the vicis foundation enables access to protective equipment and safety training and education. The only organization exclusively committed to player safety, we work to provide youth and high school players with an equal opportunity to reach their potential as athletes and people.

What it reported doing in 2018

To provide resources for protective equipment to young athletes across the united states and raise awareness with many passionate individuals and organizations poised to expand the reaches of the foundation's mission in the many years to come.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 72% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. 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: 46
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 5
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 51.5%; rating input score 51
  • Program expense ratio: 38.7%; rating input score 39

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -33%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.06; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 6.15; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 29.3%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 200% per year; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 89.9% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.3% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 51.5% of revenue deployed · 38.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $55K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2017 to 2018
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 51/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 39/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 3/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 7/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 12/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.