Homewood Baseball Leagues Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
311645336
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Homewood, IL, USA
Phone
7083071031
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Sports Associations &Training Facilities

Reported finances

Revenue
$224,054
Expenses
$251,965
Assets
$92,568
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

29 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ANGELA BRANDT (PRESIDENT)
  • JOY HEINE (BABE RUTH BASEBALL PRESIDENT)
  • KIM KAPICA (PRESIDENT BANTAM B GIRLS SOFTBALL/ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF PURCHASING)
  • JOHN WARD (PRESIDENT RIPKEN A BASEBALL)
  • KATHI LEAHY (PRESIDENT BANTAM A GIRLS SOFTBALL)
  • ROBERT MASZAK (PRESIDENT RIPKEN B BASEBALL)

People named in this filing

  • ANGELA BRANDT (PRESIDENT)
  • JOHN BLASGEN (DIRECTOR OF TRAVEL)
  • LARRY KINSELLA (DIRECTOR OF FIELDS)

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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Our mission is to create a fun, competitive and fair environment for players of all ages and abilities to improve their skills and build lifelong friendships through sport. Our nearly 70 year history in homewood was built through volunteerism, dedication and pride in creating a sense of community and nurturing a healthy love of the game.

What it reported doing in 2024

Registration fees and expenses for travel baseball leagues, in house leagues and annual tournaments.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% 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 most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 87
  • Transparency & Controls: 58
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 33
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 94.1%; rating input score 94
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • 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: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • 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: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -12.5%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.37; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -2% per year; rating input score 0; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.1% per year; rating input score 0; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.1% per year; rating input score 100; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 94.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 31 of 31 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $237K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 29 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 13 of 14 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 20/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 19/100.