Lake Travis Athletic Booster Club Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 474524206
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2023–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2022
- Location
- Austin, TX, USA
- Phone
- 5125856906
- Rating
- 88
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Educational Services and Schools - Other
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $53,621
- Expenses
- $58,392
- Assets
- $62,924
- Liabilities
- $16,283
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
5 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Dana Wiley (President)
- Kat Skyler (Vice President)
People named in this filing
- Dana Wiley (President)
- Brad Wheeler (Treasurer)
- Krystle Alvarado (Sponsorship)
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 raise funds to support the Lake Travis High School Volleyball program by helping to pay for program costs during each volleyball season and by donating funds to the program to purchase equipment and other program needs such as hotels and buses for away tournaments and away meals.
What it reported doing in 2025
Donated to the Lake Travis Volleyball Program to cover player and coach hotel and bus fees and meals to away tournaments and games as well as other various program items (video and stat tracking, practice equipment, Coaches covention etc. This benefited over 70 players, 4 coaches and 4 team managers
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 2% for direct work, 44% for grants, and 54% for member benefits.
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 total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 97
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 37
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 92.2%; rating input score 92
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -8.9%; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.08; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.26; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 46% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 9.5% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 21.7% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 92.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $54K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 3 filing years from 2023 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.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 30/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 50/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 11/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.