Virginia State Golf Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
540736931
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Midlothian, VA, USA
Phone
8043782300
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Services

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$5,794,545
Expenses
$5,127,026
Assets
$6,474,500
Liabilities
$1,677,565

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

Leadership & pay

19 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BRIAN MALONEY (PRESIDENT)
  • CRAIG GROENENDAAL (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • ANNE GREEVER (IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT)
  • MATT SMILEY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • MATT SMILEY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $252,911 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 the Virginia state golf association is to promote the game of golf and serve the needs of golf in Virginia.

What it reported doing in 2024

The vsga engages in a wide range of activities designed to educate current and future golfers, as well as engourage participation, and foster the enjoyment, of both recreational and competitive golf. As the governing body of amateur golf in Virginia, the vsga conducts individual championships for men, women and juniors, along with a series of one-day events for the casual golfer and a junior golf circuit for the younger golfer who is getting introduced to competition. Broadly speaking, vsga activities include athletic administration, support services, and education.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 88% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 91% 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

SUPPORTED - 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 some related-organization disclosures are missing.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 69
  • Transparency & Controls: 80
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 55
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 72.2%; rating input score 72
  • Program expense ratio: 83.4%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.04 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 13th 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: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Scored; rating input score 0

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 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: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 11.5%; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.26; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.26; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.9%; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 11% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.9% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.7% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 72.2% of revenue deployed · 83.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 18 of 18 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $4.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $253K · 19 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 34 of 35 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 5 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

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

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 9/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 45/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 38/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 54/100.