West University Softball Association Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 742428647
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2009
- Location
- Houston, TX, USA
- Phone
- 7133490705
- Rating
- 85
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Baseball, Softball
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,389,560
- Expenses
- $2,057,068
- Assets
- $713,872
- Liabilities
- $158,303
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
25 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- MICHAEL LIEBL (PRESIDENT)
- NICK PALASKAS (EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT)
- DANNY HUGHES (VICE PRESIDENT)
- DANIEL PESIKOFF (IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT)
- STACEY VETTERLING (CO-AUXILLIARY PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- MICHAEL LIEBL (PRESIDENT)
- NICK PALASKAS (EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT)
- DANNY HUGHES (VICE PRESIDENT)
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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
West university softball association is a neighborhood organizationcreated to support and promote girls softball. It offers recreationalteams for girls ages 4-15 and competitive tournament teams for girlsages 7-16.
What it reported doing in 2024
Amateur softball for more than 500 girls on over 50 teams. Regularseason play is a recreational league format that strives to strike anappropriate balance between competition and participation. In alldivisions except for pixies, scores are kept, win-loss records are usedto determine standings, and trophies are awarded for placement. Playersare exposed to the concepts of playing to win, learning how to lose, and the role of a team player in a competitive framework. The leaguehas participation requirements including all players rotating into theinfield at least one inning per game and, in the older divisions, usingmore than one pitcher per game. Summer tournament teams play in verycompetitive environments with a focus on winning. In all of our teams, we try to ensure fun and player development.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 40% for direct work, and 60% for grants.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
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 fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 92
- Transparency & Controls: 94
- Accountability: 70
- Sustainability: 19
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 96%; rating input score 96
- Fundraising efficiency: $11.09 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
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: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- 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: -48%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.35; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.22; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 11.6% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 8.9% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 5.2% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 96% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 25 of 25 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 25 people listed
- Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
- 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: 4 of 6 not reported.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 41/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 3/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 16/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 30/100.