Cheshire High School Band Parents' Assoc Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
061494470
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Cheshire, CT, USA
Phone
2036998163
Rating
48
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Parent/Teacher Group

Reported finances

Revenue
$66,702
Expenses
$26,985
Assets
$96,608
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Marybeth Chamberlain (President)

People named in this filing

  • Tim Orcutt (Secretary)
  • Julian Muller (Treasurer)
  • Laura Rochford (Chair)

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

To raise money to fund grants in support of the cheshire public schools' instrumental music programs, most notably, the cheshire high school marching ram band, and provide scholarships to graduating seniors of the cheshire high school instrumental music programs through the volunteer efforts of parents of current and former cheshire public school students, alumni, and other interested community members

What it reported doing in 2024

To Promote the Instrumental Music programs at Cheshire High School, and most notable the Cheshire High School Marching Ram Band

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Transfer-based 990-EZ. The 990-EZ reports grants or member benefits, but it does not separate enough spending to show the nonprofit’s full delivery mix.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 21
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 81
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 34.5%; rating input score 34
  • Program expense ratio: Limited

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 59.5%; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.58; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -14.6% per year; rating input score 0; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -7% per year; rating input score 0; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.8% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 34.5% of revenue deployed
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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 34/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.