Cuba City School District Booster Club Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
843148776
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2023–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2022
Location
Cuba City, WI, USA
Phone
6087448888
Rating
92
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and/or Fund Distribution

Reported finances

Revenue
$57,882
Expenses
$31,664
Assets
$314,659
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SCOTT WRIGHT (PRESIDENT)
  • BRIAN COULTHARD (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • SCOTT WRIGHT (PRESIDENT)
  • BRIAN COULTHARD (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • CONNIE WRIGHT (PAST-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

To raise funds and provide improved facilities and equipment in areas where the cuba city school district budget cannot support; to promote and encourage improved attendance at all sporting activities by students, parents, friends, faculty, and community leaders; to encourage high school athletes and teams to provide stewardship and community involvement; and to raise funds to support scholarships for student athletes.

What it reported doing in 2024

To raise funds and provide improved facilities and equipment in areas where the cuba city school district budget cannot support; to promote and encourage improved attendance at all sporting activities by students, parents, friends, faculty, and community leaders; and to encourage high school athletes and teams to provide stewardship and community involvement.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filed totals do not add up and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 100
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 84
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 45.3%; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 9.94; rating input score 92; 92nd 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: 116.1% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 37.9% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.1% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $59K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2023 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.

  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III program expenses within total did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.