Orangefield Athletic Booster Club
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 372059254
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2024–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2023
- Location
- Orange, TX, USA
- Phone
- 4099327069
- Rating
- 88
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Single Organization Support
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $98,478
- Expenses
- $87,384
- Assets
- $50,149
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
4 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- KYLIE SANCHES (PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- KYLIE SANCHES (PRESIDENT)
- KAYLEY GAMBLIN (VICE PRESIDE)
- KAYLA REYNOLDS (SECRETARY)
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
The orangefield athletic booster club is dedicated to empowering student- athletes through financial and moral support, fostering a spirit of teamwork, sportsmanship, and excellence. We strive to create a positive and inclusive environment that uplifts all participants, encourages community involvement, and celebrates the achievements of orangefield high school athletics
What it reported doing in 2025
The organization raises money to support student athletes and encourage community involvement. They run concessions stands and provide sponsorship opportunities at athletic games.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Other-operating. 100% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
- Distribution model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filed totals do not add up and program spending has declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 100
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 46
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 11.3%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.57; rating input score 34; 34th 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: -5.7% per year; rating input score 0; 35th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 0.5% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 24.9% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $107K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
- Consistency: 5 of 6 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 2 filing years from 2024 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.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III program expenses within total did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 34/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.