Caris Sports Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
834015201
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2020–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
Chandler, AZ, USA
Phone
6027731373
Rating
89
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and Fund Distribution

Reported finances

Revenue
$83,169
Expenses
$83,141
Assets
$21,259
Liabilities
$17,842

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

Leadership & pay

2 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • RACQUEL MCNABB (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

People named in this filing

  • RACQUEL MCNABB (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • JENNIFER KRUSE (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-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The purpose of the organization is to provide financial support to individuals, teams, and organizations to supplement the cost of participating in sports based on the economic status of individual participants in order to reduce the barrier of participation in athletics due to the inability of participants, or their parents, to cover the necessary expenses to participate.

What it reported doing in 2025

Grant quarterly distributions paid directly to organizations on behalf of applicants/recipients.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 80% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 85
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 34
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 85.1%; rating input score 85
  • Program expense ratio: 85.2%; rating input score 85

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 0%; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.26; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.84; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 11% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.4% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.2% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 85.1% of revenue deployed · 85.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $71K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 2 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 44/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 21/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 5/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.