Spring High School Spring Ind School Dist Band Booster Club

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
742212737
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Spring, TX, USA
Phone
8323412654
Rating
64
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$132,592
Expenses
$118,617
Assets
$39,938
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Elizabeth Stevens (President)
  • Sarah Parker Welsch (1st Vice President)
  • Jenna Arreguin (2nd Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Elizabeth Stevens (President)
  • Sarah Parker Welsch (1st Vice President)
  • Jenna Arreguin (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. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Spring High School Band Booster is committed to providing additional funds to the Spring High School Band & Color Guard Program. The Booster Supplements activities not provided in the district's budget. More importunately, it cover the cost of students whose parent face financial challenges.

What it reported doing in 2024

The Band Boosters fund-raised $71174. Received $13127 in donations and assessed $35734 in registration fees. The total benefits paid out to benefit students enrolled in the program total $108468. The benefits included music instruction, contest fees, music supplies, music instruments, meals and transportation. Full and partial scholarships were provided to 20 students that enrolled in the band and guard program. Transportation and meals were provided to all band members in order to participate in competitions. In addition the booster covered operating expenses of $6111 and the cost of fundraising $4395

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 73% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Member-benefit provider. The nonprofit used 100% of its reported program spending for member benefits.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 6
  • Sustainability: 52
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 81.8%; rating input score 82
  • Program expense ratio: 91.4%; rating input score 91
  • Fundraising efficiency: $32.84 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 69; 69th 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: 0%; rating input score 0; 7th 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: 10.5%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.34; rating input score 18; 18th 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: -12.9% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.4% per year; rating input score 0; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -42.5% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 81.8% of revenue deployed · 91.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 5 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $108K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 14 of 14 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
  • 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.

  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 18/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.