Mansfield High School Tiger Band Boosters

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
203110889
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2020
Location
Mansfield, TX, USA
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$248,082
Expenses
$186,966
Assets
$253,660
Liabilities
$548

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KRISTINA HOLMES (PRESIDENT/DI)

People named in this filing

  • KRISTINA HOLMES (PRESIDENT/DI)
  • AMY KUNAS (VP FUNDRAISI)
  • KERRIE JONES (VP VOLUNTEER)

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

To promote the entire band program of mansfield high school, by assisting the band directors and school authorities in the development of an outstanding band program.

What it reported doing in 2024

Mansfield high school tiger band boosters (mhstbb) supports the students and band program of mansfield high school in mansfield, Texas. Mhstbb fosters music education and music performance for these students by facilitating the musical enrichment of the student membership. The organization seeks to provide opportunities to promote music education in our community. The organization not only supports the students of mansfield high school, but also seeks to provide opportunities to other band students in the area to participate in music events.

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 99% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

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 program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 66
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 83.5%; rating input score 83
  • Program expense ratio: 96.7%; rating input score 97
  • Fundraising efficiency: $150.73 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • 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: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • 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: 24.6%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.36; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -11.3% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -9.8% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 20% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 83.5% of revenue deployed · 96.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $181K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 14 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 49/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 54/100.