Central California Soccer Alliance
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 861890967
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2022–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2020
- Location
- Fresno, CA, USA
- Phone
- 5593633498
- Rating
- 79
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $266,127
- Expenses
- $304,037
- Assets
- $117,337
- Liabilities
- $4,516
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
8 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Rachelle Beard Rudstrum (President)
Highest reported compensation
- Jonathan Petty (Director): $34,495 total reported compensation
- Rachelle Beard Rudstrum (President): $29,999 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Organize and operate recreational-level youth soccer teams; provide instruction for advanced soccer skills; and arrange matches against other competitive teams. Two of the most successful and established soccer clubs in the Fresno area, Bullard FC and CVSA , merged to form the Central California Soccer Alliance. CVSA and Bullard FC both have long and rich histories of accomplishment and have sent countless players to all levels of collegiate soccer, professional soccer leagues, and National Olympic Development teams. Central California Soccer Alliance will provide expanded opportunities for both competitive and recreational soccer players in the Central California area and is now one of the largest and most successful soccer clubs in the Fresno/Clovis area preparing our student/athletes to perform at the next level with playing principles that foste.
What it reported doing in 2024
Organize and operate recreational level youth soccer teams, and operate one or more competitive soccer teams, which will provide further instruction for those with advanced soccer skills and arrange for competitive matches against other competitive teams.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 66% 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
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 84
- Transparency & Controls: 90
- Accountability: 69
- Sustainability: 20
- Growth: 80
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 98.8%; rating input score 99
- Program expense ratio: 86.5%; rating input score 86
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -14.2%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.39; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 21.2%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 9.6% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 9.9% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -7.8% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 98.8% of revenue deployed · 86.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $263K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $34K · 8 people listed
- Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
- 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 18/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 20/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 18/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 34/100.