Seattle Baseball Academy

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
352735814
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Seattle, WA, USA
Phone
2062134000
Rating
60
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Baseball, Softball

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,002,229
Expenses
$1,824,175
Assets
$1,082,580
Liabilities
$399,000

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Wes Long (President)
  • Ben Harlan Boyd (Founder and CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • Wes Long (President): $200,000 total reported compensation
  • Ben Harlan Boyd (Founder and CEO): $84,000 total reported compensation
  • Owen Leonard (Director of Pitching Instruction): $70,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Youth baseball and softball new in 2023 club that organizes teams 26 in 2023 and collects team fees as its near exclusive source of revenue. Our teams compete regionally and nationally in league and tournament play. Club players are trained by Club coaches on a year round basis in our facility and on the field. To develop young baseball and softball players and to positively influence youth through their participation in our Club.

What it reported doing in 2024

Fall Ball Baseball Program. Each year in September and October we run oiur Fall Ball Baseball Program. Teams are formed that are distict and separate from our regular year round teams. We had 5 Fall Ball teams in 2024. These teams train and compete in a local Fall Ball League. They end this program with a trip to Las Vegas to play in the Desert Classic Tournament. Our regular baseball teams take a break during this time. Softballs regular teams play year round to include the months of September and October thus they do not need or require a Fall Ball program.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 99% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 66
  • Transparency & Controls: 59
  • Accountability: 47
  • Sustainability: 39
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 71.9%; rating input score 72
  • Program expense ratio: 78.9%; rating input score 79
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 70%; rating input score 70; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 40%; rating input score 40; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 56
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 8.9%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.59; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.37; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 28.2%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 34.5% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 36.4% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 30.2% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 71.9% of revenue deployed · 78.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 5 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $200K · 6 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 36 of 40 current checks pass · 4 findings to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2023 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 40/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 21/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 6/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX InformationTechnology column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Insurance column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 29/100.