Lincoln City Youth League

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
861050758
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2015–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
LincolnCity, OR, USA
Phone
5419923639
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Youth Development Programs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$70,788
Expenses
$59,936
Assets
$13,082
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Nicole Johnson (President)
  • Dena Patterson (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Nicole Johnson (President)
  • Dena Patterson (Vice President)
  • Whitney Estes (Secretary)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To provide sports opportunities to community youth participants

What it reported doing in 2025

Sports teams that served 200 youth of the Lincoln City and surrounding area communities. The objective of LCYL is to provide the youth of the community with opportunities to learn and develop athletic skills to foster a lifetime enjoyment of playing sports. By joining a LCYL team athletes will develop athletic skills participate in healthy physical activity enhance healthy social skills learn good sportsmanship and participate in competitive sports events.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% 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.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Revenue has declined or grown slowly and assets have declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 91
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 51
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 84.7%; rating input score 85
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 15.3%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.22; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -4% per year; rating input score 0; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -4.7% per year; rating input score 0; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 84.7% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $60K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 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 — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 19/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.