Las Plumas High School Athletic Booster Club

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
812886391
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2016–2017
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2017
Location
Oroville, CA, USA
Phone
5305328855
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Reported finances

Revenue
$9,660
Expenses
$17,175
Assets
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

People named in this filing

  • LORETTA LONG (Secretary)
  • KERRI STAFFORD (Treasurer)
  • MEGAN MILLER (ALTERNATE MEMBE)

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 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The purpose of the las plumas high school booster club is to encourage parent and community involvement in las plumas athletic functions and to raise funds to develp and improve the athletic programs for the students at las plumas high school. The booster club feels that parent and community involvement during the high school years will enhance the educational and athletic experience or our student atheletes while enriching the las plumas athletic culture.

What it reported doing in 2017

The las plumas athletic booster club in 2017. Out pupose is to creat additional athletic opportunities through fundraising to assist all student/athletes at las plumas high school. We raised over $9,600 during 2017 our fundraisers consisted of a fireworks booth, in conjunction with the kiwanis club of oroville, rib cook off at feather falls casino, tee shirt sales, and raffleswe donated $6,959 to various sports programs at las plumas high school.

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
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 total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 94
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 11
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 85.4%; rating input score 85

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -77.8%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 2; 2nd 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: 181.8% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.1% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -200% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 85.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $15K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 5 of 5 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2016 to 2017
  • 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 8/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.