Chester Mendham Little League Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
273777183
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2018–2022
Forms available
Form 990 2017, Form 990-EZ 2022
Location
Mendham, NJ, USA
Rating confidence
Limited

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$0
Expenses
$42,497
Assets
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Lauren Garofalo (President)

People named in this filing

  • Lauren Garofalo (President)
  • Terence Gogerty (VP - Softball)
  • Terence Gogerty (VP-Equipment)

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 2022. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To promote, develop, supervise, and voluntarily assist in all lawful ways, the interests of those who will participate in Little League Baseball and Softball.

What it reported doing in 2022

Through proper guidance and exemplary leadership, the Little League program assists children in developing the qualities of citizenship, discipline, teamwork and physical well-being. By espousing the virtues of character, courage and loyalty, the Little League Baseball and Softball program is designed to develop superior citizens rather that superior athletes. The objective is to promote participation in baseball and softball activities in a manner which promotes and instills in the participants, good sportsmanship, honesty, loyalty, courage and teamwork, so that they may be well adjusted, stronger and happier people.

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
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 65% for direct work, and 35% for grants.

The verdict

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 27
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 7
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: 72.1%; rating input score 72

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: Limited
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 2; 2nd 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: -30% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -29.7% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -12.9% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 72.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $31K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 15 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2018 to 2022
  • 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 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.