Bulldog Aquatic Booster Club

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
263371956
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Ruston, LA, USA
Phone
3182574634
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Swimming & Other Water Recreation

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$344,573
Expenses
$323,895
Assets
$56,258
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • PAMELA PAYNE (PRESIDENT)
  • ELIZABETH MOREAU (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • STEVEN GROCE (BOARD MEMBER)
  • CHRIS CAMPBELL (BOARD MEMBER)
  • TAYLOR ROBERSTON (BOARD MEMBER)

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

Bulldog aquatic club (bac) is a southing swimming club that provides swim team instructions and competition. Bac also provides swimming and lifeguard training and competition through the bac swim school.

What it reported doing in 2024

Team swim meet participation and travel. Members participate in approximately 20 meets in a normal year. During 2024-2025, most of our members competed in at least one meet. Participating swimmers can assess their progress in swimming through comparasion of personal times and through USA swimming time standards. Bac also hosts local swim meets for its members and the team. Home meet participation ranges from 50 to 400 athletes. Members may also participate in away competitions and team travel meets.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 93% of the money available for current operations came from other operating 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 total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 85
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 45
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 89.4%; rating input score 89
  • Program expense ratio: 95.1%; rating input score 95
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 6%; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.17; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 16% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 17.6% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 47.1% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 89.4% of revenue deployed · 95.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $308K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 18 of 19 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2019 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 10/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 53/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.