Ball Girl Baseball Corporation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 874617574
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2024–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2023
- Location
- Sun Valley, CA, USA
- Phone
- 8183035815
- Rating
- 84
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Youth Development Programs
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $87,779
- Expenses
- $87,895
- Assets
- $3,108
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
3 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- ALLISON LACEY (PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- ALLISON LACEY (PRESIDENT)
- GEOFF DELAHANTY (SECRATARY)
- BEN YASPELKIS (VICE PRESIDE)
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
To organize and provide opportunities for girls to learn, develop, play, and grow in the game of baseball. We work to connect young athletes to mentors in the game across the world as well as provide direct role models for coaches and staff members. Arranging opportunities for the girls to be able to play baseball with their girlfriends across the country and have support
What it reported doing in 2024
Provided teams and tournaments for over 100 young ladies throughout 2024, in over 10 tournaments across the us. We were the only organization that had an all girls baseball team play at the prestigious cooperstown travel ball tournament. We took 5 teams to Kentucky for bfa nationals (all girls baseball tournament). We also provided assistance to young ladies that would not normally be able to afford events/trips like these.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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: 100
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 29
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 99.9%; rating input score 100
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -0.1%; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.04; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 99.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $88K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
- Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- 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 7/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 44/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.