Rays Baseball Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
204103240
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
St Petersburg, FL, USA
Phone
7278253145
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Youth Development Programs

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,707,432
Expenses
$3,107,778
Assets
$2,802,158
Liabilities
$341,891

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JENNIFER TRAN (PRESIDENT)
  • BILL WIENER (PRESIDENT (TERM END 1/11/2024))

People named in this filing

  • JOHN HIGGINS (CHAIRMAN/SECRETARY/TREASURER)
  • JENNIFER TRAN (PRESIDENT)
  • BILL WIENER (PRESIDENT (TERM END 1/11/2024))

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

The rays baseball foundation and rowdies soccer fund is dedicated to improving the lives of those in need within our community, focusing primarily on education, youth development, wellness, and social responsibility.

What it reported doing in 2024

Rays jersey programsince 2014, the rays jersey program has outfitted more than 105,000 tampa bay area tee-ball players and coaches with jerseys and caps. The program covers more than 80 different leagues in nine area counties and has saved the leagues more than one million dollars in equipment costs. As a result of these savings, officials from some of the participating leagues have noted that they now have the ability to pass these savings along to participant families. They have also been able to repair their scoreboards, provide upgrades to dugouts, add fencing for fields, purchase additional equipment and grounds crew supplies and repair concession stands and other areas of their facilities. During 2024, the rays baseball foundation provided more than $120,000 worth of uniforms for local tee-ball players and coaches in the surrounding 9 counties.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 88% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 87
  • Transparency & Controls: 73
  • Accountability: 31
  • Sustainability: 31
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 88.8%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.82 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 89.5%; rating input score 90; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 12.5%; rating input score 12; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • 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: -14.8%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.9; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.12; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 12.3% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.2% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1.1% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 88.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 1 of 8 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 12 filed program accomplishments · $2.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $159K reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and grants
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 66 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 64 filed related-organization links
  • 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: Independent voting board scored 12/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 12/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 9/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 33/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 55/100.