Nevada National Fastpitch

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
990535695
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2024–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Reno, NV, USA
Phone
7755449833
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Baseball, Softball

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$76,743
Expenses
$99,612
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$22,869

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

Leadership & pay

2 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MATTHEW MAXWELL (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • MATTHEW MAXWELL (PRESIDENT)
  • CHRISTINE MAXWELL (SECRETARY/TREASURER)

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

Overview

Mission

Empowering Athletes, Building Champions

What it reported doing in 2024

Nevada national fastpitch provided youth development programming through competitive girls softball. The organization supported a travel team of young female athletes and volunteer coaches, fostering athletic skill development, leadership, teamwork, and resilience. Participants engaged in regular training, tournaments, and community service activities, promoting positive role modeling and civic engagement. These efforts contributed to the personal growth of the athletes and strengthened ties within the local community.

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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 99
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 16
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 97.6%; rating input score 98

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -29.8%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • What they do: 2 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 97.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $97K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 2 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 18/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.