GHS Performing Arts Boosters
Legal name: Gainesville High School Performing Arts Boosters
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 884050915
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2023–2025
- Official website data refreshed
- Aug 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025
- Location
- Gainesville, Virginia, US
- Phone
- 7038873074
- Rating
- 46
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Single Organization Support
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $14,399
- Expenses
- $11,724
- Assets
- $19,197
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
8 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- NELLY SWONGER (PRESIDENT)
- COURNEY E TAUBKEN (VICE PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- NELLY SWONGER (PRESIDENT)
- COURNEY E TAUBKEN (VICE PRESIDENT)
- NANCY (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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
GHS Boosters is here to support the school's performing arts programs through the purchase and funding of materials, music copyrights, uniforms and costumes, audition fees, and special events/clinics.
What it reported doing in 2025
Gainesville High School Performing Arts Booster Clubconducted fundraising activities to earn a little over$16,000 that was used to finance Performing Arts expenses such as the PTO
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- 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
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. 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: 10
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 57
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 8.8%; rating input score 9
- Program expense ratio: 10.7%; rating input score 11
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 18.6%; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.64; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 43.9% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 7.1% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 26% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 1 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 8.8% of revenue deployed · 10.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
- Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 3 filing years from 2023 to 2025
- 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.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 9/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 11/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.