Executive Summary
Three Critical Parameters
Per Treasurer FrameworkThis Period — What Happened
Attention Items
Financial Results
Income Statement — FY26 YTD vs Budget
Balance Sheet & Liquidity
Item #6 — Net Worth Over Time
Monthly · Derived from Cobalt GL ActualsConsolidated Club Net Worth — Entities 100, 150, 155
Trend: +$3.71M (+25.8%) over 24 months. Reflects year-end capital dues posting (notable Jun 2025 uptick) and steady FY26 accumulation.
Note: Pre-FY24 historical data requires prior audited financial statements and has not yet been loaded.
What's Driving the Changes
Each month's net worth movement explained — what made it go up or down.
Balance Sheet
Balance Sheet by Fund
Double-click a fund to view full balance sheet| Fund | Total Assets | Total Liabilities | Net Worth | Net Worth % |
|---|
Standard Liquidity & Leverage Ratios
Club-Specific Capital Health Ratios
Context that standard ratios missAsset Composition
Where the Club's Assets Sit
Liability Composition
Departmental Performance
Club Operating — Income Statement Summary
Top-line view · MTD · YTD · vs Budget · vs LY| Line Item | ◀ Current Month (May) ▶ | ◀ Year-to-Date (FY26) ▶ | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Actual | Budget | Var $ | Actual | Budget | Var $ | |
Statement of Activities — All Departments
Every department · Variance to budget · Per-member/month economics · Double-click any dept to view full income statement| Department / Line Item | ◀ Current Month (May) ▶ | ◀ Year-to-Date (Jul–May, FY26) ▶ | Per Mbr / Mo 2,536 mbrs × 11 mo |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Actual | Budget | Var $ | Actual | Budget | Var $ | ||
Department Drill-Down
Full P&L detail for major operating departments| Department | Revenue (YTD) | Expenses (YTD) | Net Income (YTD) | vs Budget | Dues Subsidy | Key Activity |
|---|
Operating Efficiency
Item #1 — Payroll Ratio
Staffing BalanceWhy this matters
Payroll is almost always the single largest expense in a private club. Total payroll (including payroll taxes) as a percentage of operating revenue tells the Board whether staffing is balanced against service expectations and revenue capacity.
VGCC currently at 54.9%. Industry median for private clubs runs roughly 50–58% depending on service model; full-service clubs with heavy F&B and golf maintenance often sit at the higher end.
Item #2 — F&B Financial Impact
Net F&B to Gross ProfitWhy this matters
F&B rarely runs a profit at private clubs — it's an amenity, not a profit center. The question is how much of the club's gross profit is being consumed to fund F&B losses. A well-run club keeps this drag manageable so dues aren't disproportionately subsidizing the dining operation.
Department Subsidies
Capital Income
FY26 Capital Position — YTD Through May 2026
Combined: Replacement + Improvement FundsFund-by-Fund Summary
Click a fund to drill into line-item detail| Fund | YTD Income | YTD Spend | Investment/Other | Net Surplus | Annual Plan | % Consumed |
|---|
Capital Plan Consumption — FY26 YTD
How much of the annual capital plan has been spentTop Capital Line Items — YTD Spend
Across both fundsLargest Unspent Capital
Budgeted but not consumed YTDItem #5 — Net Available Capital Ratio
Target: >18% for Healthy ZoneWhy this matters
Net Available Capital as a percent of Operating Revenue. This is arguably the most important single number the Board sees.
Clubs with a ratio >18% have the capital to maintain existing assets, replace them on schedule, and fund aspirational projects. Clubs below that threshold are generally running down the asset base or deferring maintenance.
How do we move to a healthy zone? The levers are: (1) capital dues increases, (2) capital assessments, (3) initiation fee volume, (4) operating surplus that flows to capital.
Item #7 — Net-to-Gross PPE Ratio
Asset Health CheckWhy this matters
Net PPE is Gross PPE (excluding non-depreciating land) minus accumulated depreciation. Net ÷ Gross = Net-to-Gross PPE Ratio.
A declining ratio signals that the club's assets are aging faster than we're replacing them. Combined with Item #5, this tells the Board whether current capital investment is keeping pace with asset consumption.
Investment Portfolio
Member Utilization
Village Scorecard
Click any column header to sort · Click a village to drill into facility breakdownThe "Props" column above reflects AR billing accounts from Cobalt (2,645 total), which differs from the official 2,536 homes at The Villages. The 109-account variance arises because AR counts billing entities — some properties have secondary accounts, and some owner transfers create temporary duplicates during the resale cycle.
| District | Official Units | AR Accounts | Variance |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cribari (700) | 576 | 616 | +40 |
| Montgomery (710) | 351 | 371 | +20 |
| Highlands (735) | 210 | 216 | +6 |
| Verano (725) | 207 | 215 | +8 |
| Olivas (745) | 207 | 211 | +4 |
| Hermosa (720) | 196 | 206 | +10 |
| Del Lago (730) | 174 | 181 | +7 |
| Single Family Homes | 152 | 157 | +5 |
| Glen Arden (740) | 120 | 121 | +1 |
| Sonata (755) | 102 | 105 | +3 |
| Estates | 75 | 78 | +3 |
| Heights (715) | 72 | 73 | +1 |
| Valle Vista (760) | 72 | 72 | 0 |
| Fairways (750) | 22 | 23 | +1 |
| Total | 2,536 | 2,645 | +109 |
Engagement %, $/Prop, and Tix/Prop in the scorecard above are calculated using AR account counts (the denominator matches the numerator source). The official 2,536 figure is used for per-member calculations on financial reports (dues, operating metrics).
Facility Revenue Mix
22-Month Engagement Trend
Property Engagement Tiers
Based on cumulative ticket count, 22 monthsVillage × Facility Revenue Matrix
Cross-sectional view — which villages drive which facilitiesMethodology & Caveats
What this dashboard shows and how
Utilization = AR ticket activity excluding Dues Postings, Payments, Adjustments, and Month-End A/R. Those are money movement, not usage. What remains is real member activity: F&B tickets, golf rounds, bistro orders, events, fees.
Properties (not members) are the unit of aggregation. A property can have a primary owner, spouse, dependents, and tenants all transacting — they all roll up to the property's village.
Engagement metrics use a 90-day rolling window. A property is "engaged" if any member attached to it produced a ticket in the last 90 days. Properties with tickets in history but nothing in the last 90 days are flagged as "dormant" — potential retention risk.
YoY comparison compares FY26 YTD (Jul 2025 through May 2026) to FY25 YTD (Jul 2024 through May 2025). Both 10-month windows.
Attention flags fire automatically: (1) village YoY drop >10%, (2) village revenue/prop <50% of club average, (3) individual properties with zero tickets in 90 days (shown in aggregate only, not by name).
Member Satisfaction
Key Takeaways
McMahon's strategic findingsAdditional Detail
Click to expandMethodology & Notes
About this survey
The McMahon Community Consultants Membership Survey was administered in August 2025 to approximately 4,000 residents. 1,385 completed responses were returned, producing a 35% response rate. This is an above-average response rate for clubs of this size and produces reliable results with ±2.0% margin of error at 95% confidence for percentage responses and ±0.1 for mean ratings.
Benchmark comparisons are drawn from McMahon's proprietary database of 41 private clubs located in residential communities, with survey data collected between 2019 and the first half of 2025. The Villages is the only club in this cohort located in the Bay Area of California.
Next wave. An annual member survey cadence is recommended with quarterly pulse questions (NPS + 3-5 rotating topics). When subsequent waves complete, this tab will expand to show trend arrows, category movements, and longitudinal tracking.