Pta Georgia Congress - Clark Creek Es Stem Pta

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
455031488
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2013
Location
Acworth, GA, USA
Phone
7707215800
Rating
60
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$44,061
Expenses
$40,505
Assets
$28,639
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Julie Baker (Co-President)
  • Anabel Lopez (Co-President)
  • Dyani Tutt (Vice President)
  • Mike Rupert (Vice President)
  • Betsy Hernandez-Calix (Vice President)
  • Zuleima Lozano (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Julie Baker (Co-President)
  • Anabel Lopez (Co-President)
  • Dyani Tutt (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

PTA Mission: To make every child's potential a reality by engaging and empowering families and communities to advocate for all children.

What it reported doing in 2024

Committee work including recycling, STEM, and Reflections, as well as school programs expenses for enhancements, supplies, and student recognition.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 65% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 43% for direct work, and 57% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 40
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 53
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 39.1%; rating input score 39
  • Program expense ratio: 42.5%; rating input score 43

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 8.1%; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.71; rating input score 37; 37th 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: 14.2% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 15.4% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 39.1% of revenue deployed · 42.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $17K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 39/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 43/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 59/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 37/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.