John S Armstrong School Pta

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
750886455
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Dallas, TX, USA
Phone
2145266846
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Parent/Teacher Group

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,501,524
Expenses
$1,404,482
Assets
$1,371,738
Liabilities
$63,911

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KATE BOATRIGHT (PRESIDENT)
  • MONET BALL (PRESIDENT-ELECT)
  • MATT MALAISE (DADS CLUB PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • KATE BOATRIGHT (PRESIDENT)
  • MONET BALL (PRESIDENT-ELECT)
  • MELISSA DVOROCSIK (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. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

This corporation is formed for the benevolent purpose of bringing the parents, teachers and children into a closer relationship with each other so that they may cooperate more intelligently in the education of children; and to that end it may sponsor meetings between parents, teachers and children; sponsor educational enterprises, lectures and entertainments designed to improve the physical, mental, moral and spiritual welfare of children, parents and teachers; and furnish books, supplies, equipment, food, clothing, money and medical attention to children and organizations which are looking after the welfare of children, parents and teachers.

What it reported doing in 2024

School facility improvement, school equipment and technology purchases, school financial assistance, memory books, classromm manipulatives, student directories, eagle store & spirit shop, teacher and staff appreciation.

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 55% for direct work, and 45% for grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 85
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 54
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 93.4%; rating input score 93
  • Program expense ratio: 99.6%; rating input score 100
  • 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 6.5%; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.98; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.3% per year; rating input score 100; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.2% per year; rating input score 100; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6% per year; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 93.4% of revenue deployed · 99.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $1.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 22 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 54/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 42/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 53/100.