California State Games

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
330177907
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
San Diego, CA, USA
Phone
6192232033
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$702,091
Expenses
$643,213
Assets
$482,795
Liabilities
$81,171

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DENNIS DUBARD (PRESIDENT)
  • MARK NEVILLE (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)

People named in this filing

  • DENNIS DUBARD (PRESIDENT)
  • NANCY ROHLAND (DIRECTOR)
  • CHERRY PARK (DIRECTOR)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of the California state games is to promote and nurture the health, education, and well-being of residents by managing a high quality amateur sports event that encourages participation and provides an olympic-style experience.

What it reported doing in 2025

The 2025 California state games were held in the summer in san diego. Participating were 5,576 athletes competing in 17 sports. The objective of the games is to host a high-quality amateur sports event that includes athletes from throughout California and neighboring states. The 17 sports included were archery, artisitc swimming, bmx racing, climbing, diving, field hockey, footgolf, judo, pickleball, rugby, skateboarding, softball, surfing, track & field, water polo and wrestling.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 69% 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

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 64
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 48
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 58.3%; rating input score 58
  • Program expense ratio: 63.6%; rating input score 64
  • Fundraising efficiency: $258.57 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 8.4%; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.75; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.17; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.5% per year; rating input score 100; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.1% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.9% per year; rating input score 100; 22nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 58.3% of revenue deployed · 63.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $409K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2011 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 58/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 53/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 35/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 28/100.