Beaverton High School Booster Club

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
510195293
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Beaverton, OR, USA
Phone
9712262250
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Scouting

Reported finances

Revenue
$70,100
Expenses
$58,140
Assets
$68,944

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • AMY FLAXEL (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • AMY FLAXEL (PRESIDENT)
  • MICHELLE HEBDEN (VICE PRESIDE)
  • NINA BALL (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-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Support activities for welfare and education of students.

What it reported doing in 2024

Support and scholarships to bhs clubs and athletics and students through concessions. Student wellness and staff appreciation through activities which include luncheons, snacks and treats for teachers. We also provide events for the entire student body such as offering hot chocolate as a treat as well. We also restarted a program to assist students in need with food and clothing as necessary. Facilitate graduation day/night activities for students through the grad night event

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 85
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 55
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 79.5%; rating input score 79
  • Program expense ratio: 95.8%; rating input score 96

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 17.1%; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.19; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -2.8% per year; rating input score 0; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.1% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 79.5% of revenue deployed · 95.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $56K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2012 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 — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 51/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.