USA Softball of Central California

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
942610817
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2022
Forms available
Form 990 2022, Form 990-EZ 2009
Location
Bakersfield, CA, USA
Phone
6613310084
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Amateur Sports Competitions

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$225,563
Expenses
$183,682
Assets
$129,543
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MARK CRAVER (PRESIDENT)
  • MELISSA JOHNSON (2ND VICE PRESIDENT)
  • JESSICA CARILLO (1ST VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • JESSICA RALLS (SECRETARY): $35,750 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The central California metro softball association dba central California amateur softball association (ccasa) strives to promote amateur softball play for all persons regardless of their age, race, color, religion, gender, national origin or physical ability. Within the guidelines established by the amateur softball association standards, ccasa establishes the bounds in which youth and adults of all capabilities can play in organized games and tournaments. Ccasa strives to help people and organizations develop softball programs that fit within the needs of their local community.

What it reported doing in 2022

Tournaments, umpire programs and other activities to develop and promote the sport of softball and support the amateur softball association

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 97% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
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 - 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: 71
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 55
  • Sustainability: 55
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 73.2%; rating input score 73
  • Program expense ratio: 89.9%; rating input score 90
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 76.9%; rating input score 77; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 18.6%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.71; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 19.5%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -11.5% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -4.7% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2% per year; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 73.2% of revenue deployed · 89.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 13 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $165K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $36K · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 19 of 19 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2010 to 2022
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 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.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 30/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 20/100.