Marcus High School Band Booster Organization

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
752911048
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Flower Mound, TX, USA
Phone
2144374534
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,144,120
Expenses
$1,149,390
Assets
$141,243
Liabilities
$33,705

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CINDY KIRKPATRICK (PRESIDENT)
  • RACHEL BAILEY (PRESIDENT-ELECT)
  • BETH DERRICK (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • CINDY KIRKPATRICK (PRESIDENT)
  • RACHEL BAILEY (PRESIDENT-ELECT)
  • BETH DERRICK (VICE PRESIDENT)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To provide moral and financial support to the band program promote and maintain community support and develop and implement fundraising projects to support the financial needs of the marcus band program

What it reported doing in 2025

The organization provides financial physical and moral support for over 220 students in the band at marcus high school. The band provides musical entertainment at the varsity football games and performs a marching program for the university scholastic league uil and music for all boa regional competitions as well as several other marching competitions. During the spring semester and concert season the band performs in several concert performances and the spring uil concert competition for the four ensembles. The band also supports individual participation in the region 24 area and state competitions as well as spring solo and ensemble competitions.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 66% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
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.

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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 93
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 28
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 98.4%; rating input score 98
  • Program expense ratio: 96%; rating input score 96
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -0.5%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.12; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.24; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.8% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.1% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -9.1% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 98.4% of revenue deployed · 96% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 20 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2017 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 29/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 7/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 23/100.