Santa Monica High School Athletic Booster Club

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
954272546
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2014
Forms available
Form 990 2014, Form 990-N 2010
Location
Santa Monica, CA, USA
Phone
3103953204
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Reported finances

Revenue
$297,307
Expenses
$314,829
Assets
$176,978
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JEFF FINKELSTEIN (PRESIDENT)
  • LAURIE SNYDER (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • JEFF FINKELSTEIN (PRESIDENT)
  • LAURIE SNYDER (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • SUZANNE GONZALEZ-DRAKE (RECORDING 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. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Also known as the viking fund, the booster club is a volunteer support group for the athletic programs of santa monica high school and provides financial assistance and lends moral support to our students, athletes, coaches and teams. Working closely with the athletics administration and coaches, the group works to maintain the quality of athletic programs, improve our athletic facilities and coordinate fundraising activities.

What it reported doing in 2014

Provide support to the santa monica high school athletic teams for coaches gear, equipment and facilities, maintenance, transportation to events, referee/umpire fees, supplies, and training.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 67% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 40
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 99.6%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 79th 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: -5.9%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.56; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

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

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 99.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 50 of 50 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $314K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 16 of 16 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.

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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 27/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 30/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is recorded as not currently operating in California.