The Saber Project
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 412354144
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2025–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025
- Location
- Laguna Hills, CA, USA
- Phone
- 9492908577
- Rating
- 81
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Fund Raising and Fund Distribution
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $500
- Expenses
- $1,444
- Assets
- $11,251
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
1 person listed
People named in this filing
- Yuri Chung (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-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The Saber Project empowers and supports the diverse fencing community of Southern California Fencing Alliance (SOCALFA) by making the sport accessible, inclusive, and inspiring for athletes at every level. We serve aspiring fencersyoung and old, recreational and competitiveby removing financial and educational barriers and building a strong, supportive community both on and off the strip. Through gently used equipment, peer mentorship, tournament and camp support, and educational resources like time management tools, we help fencers thrive. We foster leadership, teamwork, and excellence through guided programs that connect veteran athletes with new fencers and create opportunities for growth, competition, and celebration. To sustain our mission, we offer thoughtfully designed merchandise and equipment at affordable prices, with proceeds reinvested into scholarships and programming. Our scholarship programs recognize both financial need and personal merit, ensuring every motivated fence
What it reported doing in 2025
Created custom Tshirts for Fundraiser. This Fundraiser helped a Coach financially with attendance to a World Cup Competition
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
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 92
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 35
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 79.9%; rating input score 80
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -188.8%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 7.79; rating input score 89; 89th 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: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 79.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 1 people listed
- Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 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.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 5/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.