Chatham Charter Athletic Boosters Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 471624865
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2016–2020
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2020, Form 990-N 2015
- Location
- Siler City, NC, USA
- Phone
- 3365007184
- Rating
- 81
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Public Foundations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $24,277
- Expenses
- $26,256
- Assets
- $37,329
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
4 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- MIKE BOWMAN (PRESIDENT)
- CHRIS TURNER (VICE-PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- MIKE BOWMAN (PRESIDENT)
- CHRIS TURNER (VICE-PRESIDENT)
- TRACEY BROOKSHIRE (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 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To support chatham charter school athletics through attendance at games and matches. To raise funds for athletic equipment, uniforms, personnel, transportation, etc. To take leadership role in the growth and longevity of the athletics programs.
What it reported doing in 2020
Supporting the various sports teams at the school by paying for camps, equipment, referees, etc.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 63% 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
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 revenue has declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 90
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 46
- Growth: 20
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 93.4%; rating input score 93
- Program expense ratio: 86.4%; rating input score 86
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -8.2%; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.42; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -7.2% per year; rating input score 0; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -14.9% per year; rating input score 0; 26th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 3.6% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 93.4% of revenue deployed · 86.4% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $23K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 5 filing years from 2016 to 2020
- 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 — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 37/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 44/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.