Start Sideliners Athletic Boosters

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
453204260
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2017
Location
Toledo, OH, USA
Phone
4193445164
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Amateur Sports

Reported finances

Revenue
$63,262
Expenses
$71,298
Assets
$74,656
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

2 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • AMY WILT (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • BRIAN BEE (TREASURER)
  • AMY WILT (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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To support and improve the toledo start high school sports program, recognize individual student athlete and team achievements, and participate in projects thatwill have a permanent impact on the sports programs. We will work with the athletic department and coaches to determine the needs of its student athletes and coaches an priortize those needs for funding expenditure according to specific funding criteria that the club deems equitable and appropriate.

What it reported doing in 2025

Ran concession at sporting events. Net proceeds were used to fund equipment, travel, awards, lodging of athletic program. Also awarded three scholarships for start student athletes.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 77% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 56% for direct work, and 44% for grants.

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 the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 73
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 41
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 50%; rating input score 50; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: -12.7%; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.05; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -9.4% per year; rating input score 0; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.9% per year; rating input score 0; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.8% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $71K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 2 people listed
  • Consistency: 18 of 19 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2018 to 2025
  • 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: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 50/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 39/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grants require schedule f did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 28/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.