Frederick Douglass High School Cheerleaders Booster Club

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
822055438
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2019–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Lexington, KY, USA
Phone
8593515093
Rating
90
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and Fund Distribution

Reported finances

Revenue
$84,676
Expenses
$85,863
Assets
$20,112
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JESI DENTON (PRESIDENT)
  • BROOKE WHALEN (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • JESI DENTON (PRESIDENT)
  • BROOKE WHALEN (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • SAMANTHA MANNING (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

The mission of the frederick douglass high school cheerleading booster club is to provide financial, social, and educational support to the cheerleading program at fdhs and to promote and support the development of good sportsmanship, squad unity and mutual respect. This organization shall promote a congenial relationship among the membership, cheerleaders, coaches, school administrators, other school organizations and the community in general.

What it reported doing in 2024

To provide financial, social, and educational support to the cheerleading program at fdhs and to promote and support the development of good sportsmanship, squad unity and mutual respect. This organization shall promote a congenial relationship among the membership, cheerleaders, coaches, school administrators, other school organizations and the community in general.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 100
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 39
  • 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: -1.4%; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.23; rating input score 18; 18th 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: 10.1% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.4% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.2% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $86K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2019 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.

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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 41/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 18/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.