Austin Athletic Booster Club

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
263094122
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2018
Forms available
Form 990 2018
Location
Decatur, AL, USA
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$113,958
Expenses
$114,725
Assets
$88,031
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JENNIFER WOOD (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • JENNIFER WOOD (PRESIDENT)
  • ANGIE PRITCHETT (2ND VICE PRE)
  • DAVID ROYER (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. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The purpose of this organization shall be to promote athletics at austin high school, decatur Alabama, stressing scholarship, spirit and sportsmanship; to give financial assistance to the athletic program; to receive and disburse funds and to hold property for the purpose of and relative to work outlined hereof.

What it reported doing in 2018

The purpose of this organization shall be to promote athletics at austin high school, decatur, Alabama, stressing scholarship, spirit and sportsmanship; to give financial assistance to the athletic program; to receive and disburse funds and to hold property for the purpose of and relative to work outlined hereof.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program 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: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 47
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • 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: 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -0.7%; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.77; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -30.2% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -26.8% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0.9% per year; rating input score 0; 30th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 20 of 20 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $115K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 12 of 12 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2017 to 2018
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 39/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 36/100.