Monroe Elementaryprimary Pto

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
311337980
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2015–2022
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2022
Location
Monroe, OH, USA
Phone
5135398101
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Parent/Teacher Group

Reported finances

Revenue
$58,702
Expenses
$38,098
Assets
$63,713

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

People named in this filing

  • BECKY TALYOR (ELE PTO PRES)
  • KEVIN TALYOR (ELE PTO TREA)
  • JOE WARD (BOARD MEMBER)

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 2022. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The purpose of the organization is to provide an organizational base for unifying the efforts of parents and teachers in activities beneficial to monore elementary/primary school, which includes a communication link between parents and teachers. This is done by raising funds to support the activities undertaken by the teachers for the benefit of the school children.

What it reported doing in 2022

Sponsor activities for students, their families and teachers to promote communication and cooperation, family values through fun activities, additional learning opportunities and promote mutual respect between partents, students, teachers and administration.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 98% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 72
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 63
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 59.8%; rating input score 60
  • Program expense ratio: 92.1%; 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: 35.1%; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.67; rating input score 57; 57th 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: -9.2% per year; rating input score 0; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 12.8% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.2% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 59.8% of revenue deployed · 92.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $35K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2015 to 2022
  • 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 — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 57/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.