Whitman Youth Football Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 821465713
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2022–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2024
- Location
- Whitman, MA, USA
- Rating
- 86
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Amateur Sports
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $70,094
- Expenses
- $64,311
- Assets
- $22,465
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
12 people listed
People named in this filing
- SHAWNA MARONEY (CHEER COORDINATOR)
- ALICIA STEELE (ASST. CHEER COORDINATOR)
- CHRIS PORGI (ASST. EQUIPMENT MANAGER (O)
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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Whitman youth football, inc. Operates a youth football and cheerleading league for children, which includes training and coaching to develop athletic skills, fostering and encouraging teamwork and good sportsmanship, and facilitating amateur sports competition.
What it reported doing in 2024
Whitman youth football executed a successful season in 2024. The program provided approximately 215 of whitman's youth, from grades k-8, with a valuable opportunity to participate in football and cherleading conditioning, training and skill development as well as games and competitions.
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 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.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 92
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 49
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 89.1%; rating input score 89
- Program expense ratio: 97.1%; rating input score 97
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 8.3%; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.35; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 14.8% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 1.4% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 15.1% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 89.1% of revenue deployed · 97.1% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $62K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
- Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
- 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 — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 23/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 59/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.