St Cloud Tech Boys Hockey Boosters

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
472285901
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2018–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2020
Location
St Cloud, MN, USA
Phone
3202490900
Rating
94
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Reported finances

Revenue
$86,429
Expenses
$76,890
Assets
$68,606
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SCOTT AMUNDSON (PRESIDENT)
  • SARA YURCZK (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • SCOTT AMUNDSON (PRESIDENT)
  • TROY KOCKLER (TREASURER)
  • SARA YURCZK (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

Intended to support hockey players, coaches and programs.

What it reported doing in 2024

St cloud tech hockey booster club is intended to support student hockey players, coaches and programs. To raise supplemental funds through fundraising activities for use by the hockey program to enrich student experiences. Proceeds raised through fundraising should supplement and not replace the district's budgetary obligations.

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 reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 93
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 57
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 89%; rating input score 89
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 11%; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.89; rating input score 43; 43rd 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: 12.1% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.5% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13.3% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 89% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $77K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2018 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 43/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.