Armatage Pta
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 416040445
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2024
- Location
- Minneapolis, MN, USA
- Phone
- 6517075706
- Rating
- 36
- Verdict
- REVIEW
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $44,389
- Expenses
- $52,155
- Assets
- $56,801
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
4 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Kathleen Kearns (President)
- Brianne Keeney (Vice President)
People named in this filing
- Patrick Naidl (Secretary)
- Kathleen Kearns (President)
- Megan Larison (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-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The PTA is a parent-led volunteer organization. Our role is to support the needs of staff and students at Armatage Elementary School by focusing on three areas: 1) Assisting teachers and staff through coordination of volunteers; 2) Assisting with school programs, events, services, and communications; and 3) Raising funds to benefit and enhance a variety of programs and projects for our school.
What it reported doing in 2024
Parent/Caregiver Involvement, Community Building, and Student Enrichment. The PTA is a parent-led volunteer organization. Our role is to support the needs of staff and students at Armatage Elementary School by focusing on three areas: 1) Assisting teachers and staff through coordination of volunteers; 2) Assisting with school programs, events, services, and communications; and 3) Raising funds to benefit and enhance a variety of programs and projects for our school.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Other-operating. 73% 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
REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 0
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 41
- Growth: 20
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
- Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -17.5%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.09; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -37.5% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -0.8% per year; rating input score 0; 48th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 4% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 25/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 49/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.