Pta Ca Congress of Parents Teachers & Students Inc Pacific Sky Pta
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 882618006
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2024–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2023
- Location
- San Diego, CA, USA
- Phone
- 8588773435
- Rating
- 73
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $49,136
- Expenses
- $46,177
- Assets
- $36,035
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
12 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- RITU SINGLA (President)
- SHWETA SHARMA (Vice President)
People named in this filing
- RITU SINGLA (President)
- SHWETA SHARMA (Vice President)
- SCOTT ANKERS (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
The purpose of this association, in common with the purposes of the national pta and the California state pta are a) to promote the welfare of children and youth in home, school, community and place of worship b) to raise the standards of home life c) to secure adequate laws for the care and protection of children and youth d) to bring into closer relation the home and the school, that parents and teachers may cooperate intelligently in the education of children and youth, and e) to develop between educators and the general public such united efforts as will secure for all children and youth the highest advantages in physical, mental, social, and spiritual education
What it reported doing in 2024
Family and community involvementcoffee social, breakfast social, reflections, variety show, 6th grade promotion, international night
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
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 67% for direct work, and 33% for grants.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 75
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 45
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 73.3%; rating input score 73
- Program expense ratio: 78%; rating input score 78
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 6%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.78; rating input score 40; 40th 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: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 73.3% of revenue deployed · 78% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $36K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
- Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
- 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: Operating margin scored 56/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 40/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.