Mountain View School PTO
Legal name: Mountain View School Parent Teacher Organization Incorporated
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 200352967
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2016–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2014
- Location
- East Longmeadow, MA, US
- Phone
- 413-525-5450
- Rating
- 67
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Parent/Teacher Group
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $13,743
- Expenses
- $10,175
- Assets
- $13,537
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
4 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Stephanie Brusseau (Vice President)
- Gina Lamoureux (President)
People named in this filing
- Casey Mailman (Treasurer)
- Stephanie Brusseau (Vice President)
- Gina Lamoureux (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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The school and parents must work together so that the student receives all the benefits the school has to offer. Our mission statement supports our school motto: WE RESPECT OURSELVES, OTHERS AND THE ENVIRONMENT.
What it reported doing in 2024
Grant requests by Teachers & Faculty for educational and enrichment programs, equipment and/or supplies for the benefit of the students at Mountain View 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
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and program spending has declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 60
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 59
- Growth: 20
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 52.5%; rating input score 53
- Program expense ratio: 70.9%; rating input score 71
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 26%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.33; rating input score 54; 54th 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: -14.8% per year; rating input score 0; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -9.2% per year; rating input score 0; 25th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 4.7% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: Mission, programs, and operating context captured from the official website.
- Where the money goes: 52.5% of revenue deployed · 70.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $7K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
- Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 9 filing years from 2016 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.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 53/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 54/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.