Prairieville High School Athletic Booster Club

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
991911063
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2024
Official website data refreshed
Jul 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Prairieville, LA, USA
Phone
2254567826
Rating
67
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and Fund Distribution

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$322,594
Expenses
$138,466
Assets
$184,128
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KYLE KINBERGER (PRESIDENT)
  • KIMBERLY HENDRIX (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • KYLE KINBERGER (PRESIDENT)
  • KIMBERLY HENDRIX (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • RUBY DAVIS (TREASURER)

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

Our mission is to support and promote all prairieville high school athletic programs through fundraising and cultivating community relationships. We will strive to create a culture of community involvement and inclusion that is dedicated to helping our student athletes excel and thrive throughout their high school career.

What it reported doing in 2024

Prairieville high school athletic (pvhs) booster club was formed to support the various athletic programs at the high school and advocate for the needs of the team or organization. The primary source of funding is membership dues and corporate sponsorships. Pvhs booster club will enhance the quality of the school's programs by providing funding for equipment, facility improvements, and more comprehensive training and coaching. In addition to this, the club can assist in reducing the financial burden on individual members and families by covering expenses like equipment, uniforms, travel costs, facility rentals, and coaching stipends.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 88% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 95% 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 53
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 75
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 40.1%; rating input score 40
  • Program expense ratio: 93.3%; rating input score 93
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: 57.1%; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.33; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • What they do: Mission, programs, and operating context captured from the official website.
  • Where the money goes: 40.1% of revenue deployed · 93.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $129K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 18 of 18 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 40/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 48/100.