Metea Valley Athletic Booster Club

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
264538257
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2014–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
Aurora, IL, USA
Phone
6305428253
Rating
89
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and/or Fund Distribution

Reported finances

Revenue
$64,222
Expenses
$88,265
Assets
$73,408
Liabilities
$175

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Peter Bucher (President)
  • Wendi Wipff (Vice President)
  • Hagir Hasbrouck (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Peter Bucher (President)
  • Wendi Wipff (Vice President)
  • Hagir Hasbrouck (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-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Form 990 EZ, part III, Primary Exempt Purpose- Provide Funds for Improvement of Metea Valley High School through: 1 Grants for Enhancement of Athletics Programs, 2 Maintenance and Upgrade of Athletic Equipment and Facilities, 3 Educational Clinics for Coaches and Staff, and 4 Scholarships for Students Demonstrating Exceptional Academic and Athletic Abilities.

What it reported doing in 2025

Programs Grants and Clinics under $5000 Grantees: various sports programs and athletic coaches

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

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: 99
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 30
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 97.3%; rating input score 97

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -37.4%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.83; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 13.6% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.3% per year; rating input score 100; 47th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 97.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $86K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 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 15/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 43/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 29/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.