Austin Ultimate

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
272060745
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2019–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2016
Location
Austin, TX, USA
Phone
3343094577
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Amateur Sports

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$69,272
Expenses
$70,008
Assets
$114,801
Liabilities
$17,616

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ELIZABETH CARBAJAL (PRESIDENT)
  • CHELSEA PINKERTON (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • ELIZABETH CARBAJAL (PRESIDENT)
  • CHELSEA PINKERTON (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • TANNER MOORE (TREASURER)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Serving the greater austin community by organizing, promoting and developing the sports and spirit of ultimate for all ages and level of competition.

What it reported doing in 2025

Leagues - every year austin ultimate holds leagues for the greater austin community by organizing, promoting, and developing the sport and spirit of ultimate for all ages and levels of competition. In 2025, two leagues were facilitated with 272 participants from across the greater austin.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 90% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 75% for direct work, and 25% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - 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: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 45
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 82.2%; rating input score 82
  • Program expense ratio: 81.4%; rating input score 81

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -1.1%; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.64; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.15; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -5.1% per year; rating input score 0; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -3.9% per year; rating input score 0; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -4.6% per year; rating input score 0; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 82.2% of revenue deployed · 81.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $57K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2019 to 2025
  • 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.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 40/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 13/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.