Flower Mound Youth Sports Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
311514321
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Flower Mound, TX, USA
Phone
9729557328
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Baseball, Softball

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$574,871
Expenses
$630,751
Assets
$60,825
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Jeff Nelson (President)
  • Kevin Roberson (Executive Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Jeff Nelson (President)
  • Kevin Roberson (Executive Vice President)
  • Kevin Westdyk (Secretary/Treasury)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

Flower Mound Youth Sports Associations (FMYSA) primary exempt purpose is to provide nonprofit baseball and softball leagues for all boys and girls age 3 through 18 who are

What it reported doing in 2025

FMYSA established nonprofit baseball and softball leagues in various age brackets for children ages 3 through 18 who were enrolled in the Lewisville Independent School District. In 2000, the organization added a fall baseball/softball season. In 2003, the organization added Blast ball for ages 3 and 4 for both fall and spring seasons. There were 2,200 youth participants in the spring season and 1,500 youth participants in the fall season. Every child, who registered, played at least one-half of every game. FMYSA provided equipment and basic uniforms for the teams. FMYSA also provided umpires for each game. The teams played on ball fields provided by either the Town of Flower Mound or the Lewisville Independent School District.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 95% 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

STRONG - 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: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 27
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 97%; rating input score 97
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: -9.7%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.1; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -4.2% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -4.4% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -13.1% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 97% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $612K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 19 of 19 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2015 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.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 13/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 6/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.