Argyle Band Boosters

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
752799765
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2008
Location
Argyle, TX, USA
Phone
2149065479
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$342,124
Expenses
$324,549
Assets
$125,265
Liabilities
$29

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • John Breslin (President)
  • Jill Pezzuto (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • John Breslin (President)
  • Jill Pezzuto (Vice President)
  • Laura Austin (Treasurer)

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

The mission of the Argyle Band Boosters is to support the Argyle ISD band program by encouraging the growth and development of a high-quality band program that complements and extends the educational options for the students; actively developing and implementing creative avenues, which encourage students to excel through the band program both collectively and individually; Providing financial support for unique projects which promote the band program, but which are outside of school district revenue; Encouraging participation of parents and band students; Cooperating with the Argyle ISD administration, school officials, and band directors in the pursuit of all the success of these objectives.

What it reported doing in 2024

As part of the band fees collected from each student, we collect funds to buy meals for every band competition and football game throughout the marching season, then we pay for all of those meals directly. If the football team goes to the playoffs, the Argyle ISD reimburses us for meals after the fact. The meals are for approximately 560 (166 high school students and 394 middle school) students for 14 football games and 12 competitions, or approximately 6,000 meals provided.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 69% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 75% for direct work, and 25% for grants.

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 total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 45
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 92.9%; rating input score 93
  • Program expense ratio: 97.9%; rating input score 98
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th 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: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • 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: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 5.1%; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.39; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 29.4% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 12.1% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 18.3% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 92.9% of revenue deployed · 97.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $318K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 22 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 20/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 51/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 58/100.