Vipers Lacrosse

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
364622173
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2014–2016
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2016
Location
Campbell, CA, USA
Phone
4083793394
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Amateur Sports

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$39,733
Expenses
$46,349
Assets
$34,870
Liabilities
$1,597

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MAX PETERSEN (Vice President)
  • PAUL DONNOVAN (President)

People named in this filing

  • LEAH KALTSAS (Coordinator)
  • NADIA WHEATON (WEBSITE MANAGER)
  • NEIL FIGLIA (Coach Director)

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 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Youth sports league

What it reported doing in 2016

The vipers youth lacrosse club sponsors 9 boys' and girls' lacrosse teams for over 130 players, ranging from 2nd grade through high school. Founded in 2006, our players come from san jose, morgan hill, fremont, cupertino, sunnyvale, los altos and throughout the south bay. We are a non-profit 501(c)(3) corporation and not affiliated with any city or school district. We are one of the newest of the 60 club teams in northern California, ranging from redding to monterey, and from san francisco to sacramento, which play youth lacrosse under the auspices of the northern California junior lacrosse association (www.ncjlax.org). We have a short but exciting history of rapid growth combined with success on the field due in no uncertain measure by the quality of athletes and coaches we've been able to attract and retain.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 99% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 100
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 33
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -16.7%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.75; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -3% per year; rating input score 0; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -16.9% per year; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -11.3% per year; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $46K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2014 to 2016
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 23/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 40/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 30/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.