Knoxville West High Football Boosters Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
300585623
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2009–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2014, Form 990-EZ 2016, Form 990-N 2008
Location
Knoxville, TN, USA
Phone
8656027771
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Reported finances

Revenue
$98,870
Expenses
$58,324
Assets
$32,449
Liabilities
$74,339

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOEY CUPP (PRESIDENT)
  • ERIC SKVARA (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • JOEY CUPP (PRESIDENT)
  • ERIC SKVARA (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • DEBORAH LEWIS (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 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The purpose of the corporation is to promote and support a football program at knoxville west high school for the enjoyment, training and development of youth residing within the knoxville west high school district and to assist in building good moral character, citizenship and sportsmanship.

What it reported doing in 2016

Promote and support the football program at knoxville west high school.

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

STRONG - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 68
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 59
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 53.7%; rating input score 54
  • Program expense ratio: 91%; rating input score 91

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 41%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.56; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 2.29; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.1% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.8% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 53.7% of revenue deployed · 91% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $53K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2009 to 2016
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 54/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 32/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 3/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.