California Yard Sharks

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
461551454
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2018–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2019, Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2017
Location
Roseville, CA, USA
Phone
9167987653
Rating
63
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Recreation& Sports N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue
$6,010
Expenses
$3,452
Assets
$4,348

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

Leadership & pay

2 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LANCE OLIVER (President & CEO)

People named in this filing

  • LANCE OLIVER (President & CEO)
  • STEPHANIE OLIVER (Secretary)

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

The goal of the ca yard sharks is to develop and show-case a strong group of team players who show passion for the gane and are willing to work as a team while also putting forth the individual effort necessary to play their best game. We believe in the fundamentals and strive to continually develop our players and refine their skills. We are committed to a positive coaching and player attitudes which brings confidence and loyalty on the field. Winning is great but it is not our sole objective. We still believe softball should be fun. We develop competent players desiring to play at the next level. We help prepare for the recruiting process and offer key opportunities to be seen by college coaches. Academics are a priority ans we stress this to our players. We are committed to playing clean, competitive ball through good practice habits, dedication and respect for others.

What it reported doing in 2025

Supporting youth in the development of skills for softball and teaching the inprotache of sportsmanship and preperation for college level compition.

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
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

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 55
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 63
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 43.4%; rating input score 43
  • Program expense ratio: 75.5%; rating input score 76

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 42.6%; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.26; rating input score 54; 54th 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: -36.6% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -37.2% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -25.3% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 43.4% of revenue deployed · 75.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $3K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 2 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2018 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 43/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 54/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.