St Elizabeth Ann Seton Catholic HS Booster Club

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
882992819
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Vancouver, WA, USA
Phone
3609044213
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Single Organization Support
Affiliation
Christianity

Reported finances

Revenue
$167,815
Expenses
$202,732
Assets
$56,424
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Lisa Ackerman (President)
  • Jamie Towne (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Heather Crum (Director)
  • Amber Phillips (Director)
  • Cara Wood (Director)

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 Booster Club strives to further the welfare of all SC students through fundraising, promoting attendance at extra curricular and academic events, and providing discussion and financial support that directly support the programs at Seton Catholic High School.

What it reported doing in 2024

The Booster Club hosts an annual Auction and Dinner experience each year in April. In person attendence is approximately 300. The community donates items and experiences to be auctioned at the event in both a silent and live auction. Auction is available online during the week preceeding the event in order to expand fundraising opportunities. A paddle-raise fundraiser portion is used to raise money for a specific purpose as requested by the school, in FY24 this was for Safety Initiatives and all money raised was paid directly to the school (approx $94k). In future years, the paddle-raise will be conducted and funds received by Boosters then given as a direct grant to the school upon completion.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 78% 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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 85
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 29
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 84.3%; rating input score 84
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.74 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 17; 17th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • 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: -20.8%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.28; rating input score 15; 15th 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: 22.5% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -11.1% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -16.4% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 84.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $171K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 20 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 17/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 14/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 15/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.