Kosciusko Junior-auxiliary

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237427623
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2009–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2025
Location
Kosciusko, MS, USA
Phone
6626148085
Rating
86
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,373
Expenses
$12,963
Assets
$75,383

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SUKIE PHILYAW (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • SUKIE PHILYAW (PRESIDENT)
  • JAIMEE KELLEY (TREASURER)
  • AMY BOWLING (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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To help provide medical assistance, clothing, and other basic needs for underpriviledged children.

What it reported doing in 2025

The organization was able to help the local schools with supplies and clothing for less fortunate children. The organization assists underprivileged faimilies, helping to provide for their basic needs. Also, the organization helps or sponsors programs for all children in the community. Such programs include support for the leap center, a non profit organization providing after school study assistance to any child asking for help. Also, the organization provided support for the summer reading rrogram, and helping hands ministries.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 99% 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. Expenses are high relative to revenue and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 100
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 34
  • Growth: 20

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: -196.4%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.82; rating input score 86; 86th 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: -0.6% per year; rating input score 0; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -2% per year; rating input score 0; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.4% per year; rating input score 100; 54th 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 · $13K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 17 filing years from 2009 to 2025
  • 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: Operating margin scored 5/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.