The Perquimans County Athletic Boosters Club

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
561814143
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2022–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2021
Location
Hertford, NC, USA
Phone
2524269200
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Reported finances

Revenue
$62,285
Expenses
$34,388
Assets
$38,435

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • TREY HUNTER (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • TAMMI PROCTOR (TREASURER)
  • TREY HUNTER (PRESIDENT)
  • LINDA LAYDEN WHITE (SECRETARY)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To support all school athletic programs of perquimans county high school.

What it reported doing in 2025

The purpose for which the corporation is organized is to develop the spirit of enthusiasm in perquimans county for the physical and athletic programs at the public schools, to promote and sustain a climate of citizen interest and good sportsmanship in the county and to encourage the physical development and physical conditioning of the young people in the public schools of perquimans county.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 100% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
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 a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and assets have declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 63
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 63
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 47.9%; rating input score 48
  • Program expense ratio: 86.8%; rating input score 87

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 44.8%; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.12; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 11.6% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 13.3% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -4.2% per year; rating input score 0; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 47.9% of revenue deployed · 86.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $30K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2022 to 2025
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 48/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 50/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.