Buckeye Central Athletic Boosters Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
464655561
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
New Washington, OH, USA
Phone
4194929709
Rating
57
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Scholarships, Student Financial Aid Services, Awards

Reported finances

Revenue
$76,296
Expenses
$63,730
Assets
$114,166

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • AMANDA ESTRIDGE (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • ERIN ROSE (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • ERIN FISHPAW (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • LIZA HAFNER (TREASURER)
  • AMANDA SIEFERT (SECRETARY)
  • AMANDA ESTRIDGE (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-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

On schedule o

What it reported doing in 2024

Expenses incurred for the maintenance and upkeep of sports equipment, facilities, uniforms, camps, coaching, and awards for buckeye central school athletics

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 90% 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

MIXED - 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: 43
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 58
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 40.5%; rating input score 40
  • Program expense ratio: 48.4%; rating input score 48

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 16.5%; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.79; rating input score 62; 62nd 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: -9.5% per year; rating input score 0; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -5.3% per year; rating input score 0; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0.8% per year; rating input score 0; 35th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 40.5% of revenue deployed · 48.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $31K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 40/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 48/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.