The High Steppers Drill Team Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
330911368
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2021, Form 990-N 2020
Location
San Diego, CA, USA
Phone
6197420369
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Dance

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$302,799
Expenses
$299,995
Assets
$48,782
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CHAROLETTE PATTON-LOGAN (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • CHAROLETTE PATTON-LOGAN (President): $53,800 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

See Form 990, Part I, Line 1.

What it reported doing in 2024

The drill team program serves approximately 55 young people ages 3-17 per year over fall, spring, and summer semesters, utilizing military drill technique, step, and dance routines as an access point for creative youth development. Specifically, the program nurtures youths through skill-building, inquiry, and expression, helping them cultivate healthy relationships with their peers and build social and emotional resiliencies. Youths are supported as they work together towards performing in competitions and public performances throughout the year. Competitions include the Sharp Knott's Berry Farm Cheer, Dance, and Drill State Championship, and the National Football, Cheer, and Step competition in Orlando, FL. The drill team also contributes to the arts and culture of the community by performing in local festivals and parades, including the MLK, Jr. Parade, Veterans Day Parade, Port of San Diego Holiday Bowl Parade & Halftime Show, Juneteenth Celebration & Festival, San Diego Annual Cultural Faire, Chula Vista Parade, and the Kuumba Festival, which events garner audiences of 3,000-20,000 people. The organization regularly assesses the success of its program by collecting testimonials from program participants. Through anecdotal testimonials, program participants have shown increased engagement in school and their ability to strive for excellence. The organization also utilizes the Holistic Student Assessment - a data driven, self-report tool created by Harvard University and McLean Hospital - to aid the organization in evaluating social-emotional development in youths in order to better support them through direct programming. The tool measures: resiliencies emotional control, trust, empathy, learning and school engagement learning interest, critical thinking, and relationships with peers and adults.

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

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 50
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 73
  • Sustainability: 34
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 49.8%; rating input score 50
  • Program expense ratio: 50.1%; rating input score 50
  • Fundraising efficiency: $17.55 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 54; 54th 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: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 90%; rating input score 90; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: 0.9%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.16; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 17.9%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 32% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 40.9% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 30.8% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 49.8% of revenue deployed · 50.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 10 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $150K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $54K · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 20 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 50/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 50/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 54/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 42/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 9/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 21/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.