Silver Starlites Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 900613707
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2024
- Location
- Hopewell Junction, NY, USA
- Phone
- 8453923362
- Rating
- 86
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Amateur Sports
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $53,474
- Expenses
- $51,667
- Assets
- $9,884
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
5 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- VALISA HENRY (PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- VALISA HENRY (PRESIDENT)
- PATRICIA DONOHUE (SECRETARY)
- MELANIE ANDERSON (TREASURER)
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 silver starlites are a nationally competitive baton twirling organization dedicated in furthering the sport of baton twirling by encouraging and educating youth in the fine techniques of baton twirling that will promote teamwork, coordination, sportsmanship, athleticism, and creativity.
What it reported doing in 2024
The silver starlities are a nationally competitive baton twirling organziation dedicated in furthering the sport of baton twirling by encouraging and educating youth in the fine techniques of baton twirling that will promote teamwork, coordination, sportsmanship, athleticism, and creativity.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- 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
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 93
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 36
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 91.6%; rating input score 92
- Program expense ratio: 94.8%; rating input score 95
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 3.4%; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.19; rating input score 16; 16th 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: 6.4% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 6.4% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 3.5% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 91.6% of revenue deployed · 94.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $49K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
- Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 13 filing years from 2010 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.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 16/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 52/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.