Grant School Booster Club

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
954387667
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2009–2015
Forms available
Form 990 2014, Form 990-EZ 2015
Location
Santa Monica, CA, USA
Phone
3104507684
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$33,510
Expenses
$54,279
Assets
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Alison Havel (CO-PRESIDENT)
  • Greg Barker (CO-PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • Sarah Jane Barney (CO-EVP)
  • Julie Waterstone (LEGISLATION)
  • Jenelle Beekman (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 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The pta booster club is the primary fundraising and community-building organization at grant elementary school. It is the club's responsibility to raise money to support grant elementary school and its students by enriching public school education. We sponser various events and programs in order for the club to generate funds including the following: direct donationcarnival

What it reported doing in 2015

To provide the children at grant elementary school a safe, well-rounded, balanced, educational experience. We work closely with the staff and administration to create a budget to provide funding for needed programs and materials. Some programs cover: instructional assistants in grades k and 1science and technology consultantsfine arts programsteacher supplies and grantsplayground supervisionreading specialisteducational assembliesfield trips and celebrations

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 69% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filed totals do not add up and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 100
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 12
  • Growth: 0

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; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -62%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -14.4% per year; rating input score 0; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -8.3% per year; rating input score 0; 24th 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 · $252K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 16 people listed
  • Consistency: 4 of 5 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2009 to 2015
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Part III program expenses within total did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 10/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is recorded as not currently operating in California.