Plant High Rowing Association Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
593611355
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Tampa, FL, USA
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Swimming & Other Water Recreation

Reported finances

Revenue
$442,082
Expenses
$445,855
Assets
$444,625
Liabilities
$133,012

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Susan Lucas (President)

People named in this filing

  • Kelly Carling (Fundraising)
  • Mary Ann Schleelein (Travel)
  • Clay Daniels (Regatta Coordinator)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The purpose of the PHRA is to provide equipment, training, and a competitive experience for all students at H.B. Plant High School who are interested in developing skills necessary to compete on a team.

What it reported doing in 2024

In the school year 2024-2025 approximately 90 students spent 18 hours a week for 37 weeks in training to compete in 10 regattas. The adult members of the organization volunteered approximately 2000 hours for the organization. The funds from community support and volunteer hours provide the rowing opportunities for any student regardless of gender, ethnic or economic factors.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 82% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 84
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 39
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 95.5%; rating input score 96
  • Program expense ratio: 92.5%; rating input score 92
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -0.9%; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.3; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.1% per year; rating input score 100; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.1% per year; rating input score 100; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.2% per year; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 95.5% of revenue deployed · 92.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $412K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 22 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2012 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 37/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 40/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 16/100.