Shawnee Athletic Boosters

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
454365948
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Springfield, OH, USA
Phone
9372664155
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Reported finances

Revenue
$186,970
Expenses
$242,884
Assets
$115,518
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LARRY LANGE (PRESIDENT)
  • AMBER MORGAN (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • LARRY LANGE (PRESIDENT)
  • AMBER MORGAN (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • JANEL BUMGARDNER (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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The shawnee boosters club shall promote a mutual unity of action to ensure support of shawnee athletic progrms by fulfilling the following objectives: 1. To aid, develop, encourage and support the advancement of student athletes at shawnee in cooperation with the athletic director, principal, school board, and coaching staff in compliance with regulations and rules of the Ohio high school athletic association and other applicable laws. 2. To aid, develop, encourage and support the individual growth and development of student athletes at shawnee regadlsss of ancestry, coor, nationl origin, race, religion, sex and socio-economic background. 3. To encourage and suport the academic endeavors of studnet athletes at shawnee. 4. The stimulation of community interest and particpation in the shawnee athletic programs. 5. The promotion of school spirit and sportmanship; encourage attendance at all shawnee athletic events. 6. The raising of supplementary funds.

What it reported doing in 2024

Athletic facilities improvements - funding improvements to athletic facilities such as scoreboards, field matenance, weight room equipment, or training facilities.

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
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

SUPPORTED - 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 fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 87
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 52
  • Sustainability: 29
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 82%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: $10.59 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 80%; rating input score 80; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -29.9%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.48; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

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

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 82% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 5 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $199K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 18 of 18 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.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 41/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 10/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 23/100.