SASO Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 455250195
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2013–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025
- Location
- Southlake, TX, USA
- Rating
- 68
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Youth Development Programs
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $47,414
- Expenses
- $19,419
- Assets
- $175,311
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
4 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Tracey McDevitt (President)
People named in this filing
- Laural Skiendzielewski (Treasurer)
- Tracey McDevitt (President)
- Jamor Klopfenstein (VP)
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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
SASO members strive everyday to better themselves through academic and athletic endeavors. As they do so, they acknowledge that in order to complete their self-growth and maturity, it is essential to recognize that others are less fortunate and it is their responsibility to be of service to them. Serving others is a priority and an essential element to achieving a complete and fulfilled life.
What it reported doing in 2025
SASO members work together to make a meaningful difference in the community through service partnerships with World Youth, Student Advisory Council, SoupMobile and numerous other organizations.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
- 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
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and program spending has declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 42
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 77
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 27.1%; rating input score 27
- Program expense ratio: 66.1%; rating input score 66
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 59%; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 9.03; rating input score 91; 91st 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: -3.2% per year; rating input score 0; 39th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 3.6% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 14.2% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 27.1% of revenue deployed · 66.1% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $13K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
- Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 13 filing years from 2013 to 2025
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 27/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.