Colorado Wildfire Senior Women's Softball
Legal name: Rocky Mtn Senior Womens Softball Club
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 863644156
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2023–2023
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2023
- Location
- Denver, CO, USA
- Phone
- 3035963838
- Rating
- 35
- Verdict
- REVIEW
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Recreational l Clubs
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $10,405
- Expenses
- $9,707
- Assets
- $7,661
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
11 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Ruth Rodgers (President)
People named in this filing
- Ruth Rodgers (President)
- Glenda Sinks (Secretary)
- Ann Noble (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 2023. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
By practicing and competing in a welcoming team setting, we positively impact the lives of senior women and the community by nurturing and encouraging fitness, camaraderie, teamwork, friendship, mental health, and socialization.
What it reported doing in 2023
More than 60 women over the age of 50 and up to 82 years old in the Denver Metropolitan area participated in coached weekly softball practices. Teams were divided into five age groups which competed in four tournaments in western states. In addition, two intra-squad tournaments were held. The season lasted from April through October. The Club provided balls, bats, umpires, fields, coaches, etc. Women rose to higher skill levels and camaraderie was evident among the women.
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
REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 0
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 53
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
- Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 6.7%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.79; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 69; 69th 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
- What they do: 3 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 11 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 1 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.
Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 58/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 39/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.