Sayo Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
208043819
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2017
Forms available
Form 990 2017
Location
Brooklyn, NY, USA
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Baseball, Softball

Reported finances

Revenue
$15,735
Expenses
$14,384
Assets
$7,715
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • RUNIE MENSCHE (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • RUNIE MENSCHE (PRESIDENT)
  • SHARON YOUNGE (VICE PRESIDENTTREASURER)
  • JULIO LASALLE (SECRETARY)

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 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To organize, stablish, create and maintain a baseball team.to promote, foster and advance in every lawful manner, the common interest and goals of those engaged in the sport of baseball.

What it reported doing in 2017

In 2017 SAYO served one team of 18U with ages 15 through 18.The 18U freshmen teanm had twenty-two student athletes, which included fourteen high school seniors.The 18U Junior Team won the Parade Ground League Championship in Younstown, OH.SAYO Grays held winter gym workouts at Prime Time batting cage from January through March.The Junior Team met from 9 am - 12 pm two time a week.SAYO volunteers assistance student and parents with college applications.SAYO visited the colleges of North Central Missouri, Dundalk Community College, Rhode Island Community College, Fisher College, SUNY Ulster, SUNY Duches and SUNY Schenectady.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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

STRONG - 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 program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 52
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 87.3%; rating input score 87
  • Program expense ratio: 95.5%; rating input score 96
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 8.6%; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.54; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -26.4% per year; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -14.3% per year; rating input score 0; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 21.3% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 87.3% of revenue deployed · 95.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $14K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 14 of 14 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2011 to 2017
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 18/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.