North Carolina District 2 Little League Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 933067365
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2024–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2024
- Location
- Pfafftown, NC, USA
- Phone
- 3368130934
- Rating
- 85
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $33,615
- Expenses
- $28,438
- Assets
- $59,717
- Liabilities
- $22,837
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
10 people listed
People named in this filing
- Chris Swink (District Administrator)
- Jeremy Chapman (District Secretary, District UIC)
- Scott Newman (District 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
The purposes for which the Corporation is organized are exclusively charitable or religious within the meaning of Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, and N.C.G.S. § 55A-1-40(4), and shall include, but not be limited to (i) developing and promoting youth sports and providing education and instruction with regard to youth sports; and (ii) administering, guiding, educating, supporting and promoting the policies, rules, regulations and guidelines of Little League Baseball, Incorporated and, for such purposes, making distributions to organizations chartered by Little League Baseball, Incorporated and that qualify as exempt organizations under Section 501(c)(3) and 501(a) of the Internal Revenue Code or the corresponding section of any future federal tax code.
What it reported doing in 2024
Support member leagues traveling to state level & higher post season tournaments.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filed totals do not add up and liabilities are high compared with assets.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 98
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 59
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 97.2%; rating input score 97
- Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 15.4%; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.1; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.38; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
- 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
- Where the money goes: 97.2% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 4 filed program accomplishments · $33K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- 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.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III program expenses within total did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 10/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.