Healdsburg Prune Packers Baseball Club Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
471733114
IRS 990 coverage
2021–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2020, Form 990-N 2013
Location
Healdsburg, CA, USA
Phone
7075758228
Rating
61
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Baseball, Softball

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$346,909
Expenses
$321,462
Assets
$245,510
Liabilities
$726

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • RICHARD BUGARSKE (President-Treas)

Highest reported compensation

  • JOEY GOMES (GM, HC): $75,000 total reported compensation
  • MAX SHUPE (Secty, A-Coach): $6,500 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The organization's primary exempt purpose is to develop elite collegiate student athletes' social, academic and athletic skills through collegiate summer baseball competition in a host family environment while developing into role models for aspiring younger student athletes. Our second exempt purpose is to promote and encourage youth participation in local competitive baseball, particularly economically disadvantaged youth by providing them with role models from the healdsburg prune packers baseball team.

What it reported doing in 2024

Providing an annual program to include but not limited to the following, a competitive youth baseball program benefiting student athletes by teaching and coaching them to the next level of competitive baseball while developing their social and academic performance and their commitment to role modeling.

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 99% 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. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 68
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 0
  • Sustainability: 44
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 77%; rating input score 77
  • Program expense ratio: 70.5%; rating input score 71
  • Fundraising efficiency: $2.75 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings

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: 0%; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 7.3%; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.76; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 25.4%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 16.2% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 17.3% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 28.9% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 77% of revenue deployed · 70.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 8 board members independent · 0 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $227K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $75K · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2021 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 7 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 12/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 55/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 34/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 14/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 52/100.