First Serve Okc Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
463499004
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-T 2024, Form 990-N 2013
Location
Oklahoma City, OK, USA
Phone
4059670445
Rating
67
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Racquet Sports

Reported finances

Revenue
$572,416
Expenses
$531,568
Assets
$431,836
Liabilities
$15,762

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MARK ALLEN (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • TONY M MULLICAN (EXECUTIVE DI): $97,068 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Strengthening the lives and enhancing the character of Oklahoma city youth through tennis and education.

What it reported doing in 2025

The community program is first serve okc's most far-reaching program, designed to introduce students to tennis while building confidence, teamwork, and foundational life skills. In 2025, the program served 1,068 students across 32 Oklahoma city public schools and community-based sites. The program is delivered in school gyms in 6 week sessions, with each session serving 4 to 6 elementary and middle schools. At the conclusion of each session, participating schools are invited to the okc tennis center for a culminating tennis party. First serve okc partners with Oklahoma city public schools, the Oklahoma city indian clinic, positive tomorrows, okc police athletic league, and fields & futures to ensure access for students from diverse and underserved communities.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 96% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 47
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 42
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 49.3%; rating input score 49
  • Program expense ratio: 52.7%; rating input score 53
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5.01 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 16; 16th 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: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 7.1%; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.81; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 18.3%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.3% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.7% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2.1% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 49.3% of revenue deployed · 52.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $280K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $97K · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2014 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 49/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 53/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 16/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 50/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 37/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 19/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 47/100.