Georgia Winterguard Group Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
332315735
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2024
Location
Atlanta, GA, USA
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Arts Education

Reported finances

Revenue
$46,426
Expenses
$45,959
Assets
$467

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Tavius Cooper (Executive Director)

People named in this filing

  • Tavius Cooper (Executive Director)
  • Sarai Haynes (Director of Finance)
  • Larry Couch (Director of Strategic Relationships)

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

Georgia Movement Collective Inc. was formed to provide educational and performing arts opportunities through winter guard and movement arts. The organization supports youth and young adult performers through rehearsals instruction leadership development and competitive performance opportunities.

What it reported doing in 2025

Georgia Movement Collective Inc. provided educational and performing arts opportunities through winter guard and movement arts programming for youth and young adults. The organization conducted rehearsals training performances and competitive events focused on leadership teamwork artistic development and performance education. Funds supported rehearsal space costumes equipment travel lodging meals and competition participation throughout the season.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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. Total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 94
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 30
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 94.1%; rating input score 94
  • Program expense ratio: 95%; rating input score 95

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 1%; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.01; rating input score 7; 7th 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: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 94.1% of revenue deployed · 95% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $44K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • 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 — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 7/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 46/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.