Portola Purple Pride Booster Club

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
943376793
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2013–2020
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2020
Location
Portola, CA, USA
Phone
5308324233
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Reported finances

Revenue
$8,789
Expenses
$7,228
Assets
$22,059

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LINDSAY WICKS (Vice President)
  • ERIN KLEMESRUD (President)

People named in this filing

  • VERONICA POWELL (Treasurer)
  • KATIE VANKOL (Secretary)
  • LINDSAY WICKS (Vice 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 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Boosters provide much needed resources for supplies and programs necessary for providing a basic and exceptional education for the students of Portola High School in rural northeastern CA. They fundraise monies to provide support for all areas of education including science, math, music, library, arts, culinery and athletics. With budgets being cut so severely the all volunteer board is providing crucial support for the school and students.

What it reported doing in 2020

Sports, music, academic, and vocational supplies and opportunities were provided for students which otherwise would not have been available. The Boosters provide a much needed resource in providing quality education for the students of this Northeastern California community.Normal annual expenditures would be made for the library, field trips, boys and girls athletic supplies, music, art, and culinery supplies, science and math teaching aids, etc...

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 77% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

STRONG - 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: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 57
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 82.2%; rating input score 82
  • 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: 17.8%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.05; rating input score 65; 65th 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: -12.3% per year; rating input score 0; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -10.2% per year; rating input score 0; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -7.3% per year; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 82.2% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $7K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2013 to 2020
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.
  • High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is not authorized to operate as a charity in California.