Pta Ohio Congress-king Pre El

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237253671
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2015
Location
Akron, OH, USA
Phone
0000000000
Rating
47
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Parent/Teacher Group

Reported finances

Revenue
$55,405
Expenses
$21,991
Assets
$108,299
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

  • Clarissa Kornell (President)
  • Jasmine Phelps (1st Vice President)
  • Evelyn Rizzo (2nd Vice President)
  • Laura Knott (2nd Vice President)
  • Elizabeth Vernatter (3rd Vice President)
  • Kim Donatelli (3rd Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Clarissa Kornell (President)
  • Jasmine Phelps (1st Vice President)
  • Evelyn Rizzo (2nd 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 King School PTA is organized to provide resources for King Community Learning Center by providing supplies programming and other funds needed for students and teachers

What it reported doing in 2024

Direct teacher support through educational support grants

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 76% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

MIXED - 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: 10
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 84
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 6.5%; rating input score 6
  • Program expense ratio: 16.4%; rating input score 16

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 60.3%; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.92; rating input score 84; 84th 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: 46.3% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.3% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.4% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 6.5% of revenue deployed · 16.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $4K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2013 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.

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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 6/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 16/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.