Perrysburg School Band Boosters

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
272667864
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Perrysburg, OH, USA
Phone
4198743181
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Reported finances

Revenue
$42,357
Expenses
$30,099
Assets
$106,121

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • EMILY JORDAN (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • EMILY JORDAN (PRESIDENT)
  • HEIDI KOEDAM (VICE PRESIDE)
  • NANCY FUENTAS (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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To promote support of the marching bands and majorettes fo the perrysburg school district of perrysburg, Ohio through money raising drives and donations for the purpose of purchasing band and majorette uniforms, band instruments and for the general support of the band directors.

What it reported doing in 2024

To promote support of the marching bands and majorettes of the perrysburg school district of perrysburg, Ohio through money raising drives and donations for the purpose of purchasing band and majorette uniforms, band instruments and for the general support of the band directors.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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 revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 68
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 72.2%; rating input score 72
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 28.9%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.53; rating input score 78; 78th 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: -6.5% per year; rating input score 0; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -5.6% per year; rating input score 0; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.8% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 72.2% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $30K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.