Jeff Ream Posted December 20, 2016 Share Posted December 20, 2016 indeed the 990's were very enlightening, and seeing a - before the numbers isnt always a bad thing. Bucs I know had some truck issues that probably hurt the wallet some. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UNCGQ Posted December 20, 2016 Share Posted December 20, 2016 (edited) As many have said, it's not so much just the bottom line asset number, or what direction it's going, but 'how' each org chooses to interpret it's numbers that they submit to the IRS. You could change the person/firm who prepares your 990, and it may look like a completely different picture the next year depending on how you classify expenses and income. For those who have experience with the budgets of these things, the most interesting reading is deeper inside the filing. It's also interesting to see a rough idea of 'total organizational cash flow' and to just mentally try and match up to our 'perception' of the organization based on anecdotal evidence. If our resident expert returns, I'd love to see a compiled sheet of the corps, after all the entire activity is built on volunteer labor ;) -Larry Edited December 20, 2016 by UNCGQ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fran Haring Posted December 20, 2016 Share Posted December 20, 2016 indeed the 990's were very enlightening, and seeing a - before the numbers isnt always a bad thing. Bucs I know had some truck issues that probably hurt the wallet some. I hear ya... I know next to nothing about financials, but I wonder if "one-off" expenses/writedowns like this are a big factor for any given corps, for any given year, that can skew the overall numbers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron H Posted December 23, 2016 Author Share Posted December 23, 2016 (edited) I'm not sure you guys are responding to the obvious issue. This is NOT a "one year" blip. Go back 10 years and the pattern is still plainly clear. There is no room for "interpretation" of numbers reported to the IRS. That would be illegal. Because there are strict rules in place that define the legal parameters of a 501© 3 Non-Profit Organization. One corps is worth several times the value of the top 10 DCA Corps combined. That's an effin big deal. And MBI is clearly the geographic outlier of DCA. There is a serious disparity here. We're not talking about some minor "skewering" of numbers. This is a magnitude of difference. That said, if MBI can be financially successful a thousand miles away from the heart of DCA, why the hell aren't the "traditional" DCA corps doing their part to bolster their own finances to ensure the future of All-Age corps? Is DCA really "one paycheck" away from oblivion? Edited December 23, 2016 by Ron H 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.