Glenelg Marching Unit Boosters Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
453180508
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Glenelg, MD, USA
Phone
4104091341
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$34,173
Expenses
$23,104
Assets
$139,493
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • GEORGE CONNOLLY (PRESIDENT)
  • JENNIFER CONNOLLY (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • BARBARA BALL (RECORDING SE)
  • GEORGE CONNOLLY (PRESIDENT)
  • JENNIFER CONNOLLY (PRESIDENT)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To support the marching band of glenelg high school.

What it reported doing in 2024

Program service accomplishments: the glenelg marching unit website (www.glenelgbands.com). Purchase of marching unit uniforms purchase of new band instruments repair of band instruments repair and fitting of marching unit uniforms each school year repair and fitting of symphonic band tuxes each year. School snack bar after school every day school snack bar during indoor sporting events host annual howard county adjudication for 13 high schools and all middle schools o provide lunch and dinner for judges o provide meals for students at selective events. Provide photos of all marching unit events during year purchase silks squad flags, dance team pompoms, and performance equipment

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 79% for direct work, and 21% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 67
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 68
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 66.1%; rating input score 66
  • Program expense ratio: 91.7%; rating input score 92
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • 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: 32.4%; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 6.04; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -14.1% per year; rating input score 0; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -17.4% per year; rating input score 0; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0.4% per year; rating input score 0; 38th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 66.1% of revenue deployed · 91.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $21K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 18 of 18 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2012 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.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 53/100.