Franklin Athletic Boosters Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
271548282
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2017–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Reisterstown, MD, USA
Phone
4432710197
Rating
62
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Scholarships, Student Financial Aid Services, Awards

Reported finances

Revenue
$18,929
Expenses
$19,714
Assets
$22,363
Liabilities
$210

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KAYCEE WRIGHT (PRESIDENT)
  • NICOLETTE MARIA POWERS (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • KAYCEE WRIGHT (PRESIDENT)
  • NICOLETTE MARIA POWERS (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • JASON DELL (TREASURER)

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

Supporting athletic programs of franklin high school

What it reported doing in 2024

Funds were raised through membership dues and variousfundraising events advancing the athletic program offranklin high school and baltimore county public schools

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 51% for direct work, and 49% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 53
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 42
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 53.9%; rating input score 54
  • Program expense ratio: 51.8%; rating input score 52

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -4.1%; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.13; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -9.3% per year; rating input score 0; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.8% per year; rating input score 0; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.8% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 53.9% of revenue deployed · 51.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $10K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2017 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 54/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 52/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 37/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 50/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 29/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.