El Camino Wildcat Booster Club

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
330094813
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2010
Forms available
Form 990 2010
Location
Oceanside, CA, USA
Phone
7607578550
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Recreation& Sports N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$213,562
Expenses
$214,925
Assets
$47,662
Liabilities
$2,364

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2010. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2010. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

This organization serves the students of el camino high school - funds are raised and used for ths sole purpose of providing meaningful services to the students. Services include athletic activities.

What it reported doing in 2010

The booster club is established as a support group in order to encourage parentparticipation and to raise funds to enhance and expand the athletic programs that areavailable to each individual student at el camino high school. The booster club believesthat parent involvement during the high school years can be a key to the success of theindividual student.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 61% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
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

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 38
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -0.6%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.22; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -29.6% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.1% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 32 of 32 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $215K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2009 to 2010
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.

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.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 42/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 14/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 47/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.
  • High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is not authorized to operate as a charity in California.