PS126/MAT Parent Association
Legal name: Ps 126 Manhatten Academy of Technology Parents Association
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 300497625
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2017–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2018
- Location
- New York, NY, US
- Phone
- 2129622188
- Rating
- 89
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Parent/Teacher Group
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $79,191
- Expenses
- $60,953
- Assets
- $89,099
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
7 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- AMY COMBS (CO-PRESIDENT)
- JENNY GRANGE (CO-PRESIDENT)
- DANNY CHAN (CO-VICE PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- AMY COMBS (CO-PRESIDENT)
- JENNY GRANGE (CO-PRESIDENT)
- DANNY CHAN (CO-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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The PS126/MAT Parent Association supports the school community by funding programs in chess, arts, music, sports, and early literacy, and by fostering parent involvement.
What it reported doing in 2024
The running and organization of school programs and activities.
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. Total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 82
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 67
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 73.7%; rating input score 74
- Program expense ratio: 95.8%; rating input score 96
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 23%; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.46; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 2.6% per year; rating input score 100; 56th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 10.9% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 12.7% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 6 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 73.7% of revenue deployed · 95.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $58K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 7 filing years from 2017 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 — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 57/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.