Ocean State Dragons

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
922648905
IRS 990 coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Cape Coral, FL, USA
Phone
4017418801
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Baseball, Softball

Reported finances

Revenue
$204,787
Expenses
$197,917
Assets
$14,835
Liabilities
$3,798

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JEREMY REPOSA (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • JEREMY REPOSA (PRESIDENT)
  • CHRISTINE REPOSA (TREASURER)
  • BEN REPOSA (DIRECTOR)

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

Overview

Mission

To nbsp; provide nbsp; high nbsp; level nbsp; baseball nbsp; and nbsp; softball nbsp; training nbsp; for nbsp; children nbsp; who nbsp; want nbsp; to nbsp; improve nbsp; their nbsp; skills nbsp; in nbsp; a nbsp; competitive nbsp; environment nbsp; giving nbsp; all nbsp; children nbsp; equal nbsp; opportunity nbsp; to nbsp; compete nbsp; on nbsp; a nbsp; travel nbsp; team nbsp; and nbsp; get nbsp; noticed nbsp; by nbsp; high nbsp; schools nbsp; and nbsp; colleges

What it reported doing in 2025

Ocean state dragons provides an equal opportunity for all players to compete in high level softball and baseball tournaments around the country. Teams have various opportunities to fundraise to ensure all players are able to travel and compete. All fees are then paid by ocean state dragons.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 85% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Member-benefit provider. The nonprofit used 99% of its reported program spending for member benefits.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 81
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 32
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 88.4%; rating input score 88
  • Program expense ratio: 91.4%; rating input score 91
  • Fundraising efficiency: $2.86 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 10th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 3.4%; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.07; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.26; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 93.2% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 117.1% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 88.4% of revenue deployed · 91.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $175K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 16 of 17 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 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.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 13/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 6/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 43/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 14/100.