University High School Parents Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
942848207
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2018–2022
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2022, Form 990-N 2013
Location
Tucson, AZ, USA
Phone
5208503994
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$60,902
Expenses
$52,226
Assets
$72,040

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Jacqueline Bruhn (President)
  • Zeba Basu (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Jacqueline Bruhn (President)
  • Zeba Basu (Vice President)
  • Alison DeVore (Treasurer)

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 2022. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The uhs parents association strives to facilitate parent communication cooperation and involvement our mission is to build and promote a strong uhs community and provide tangible support for the students teachers programs and activities of university high school

What it reported doing in 2022

The grad night party is a decade long tradition that is coordinated by the uhspa and staffed with parent volunteers immediately following commencement ceremonies seniors are transported back to the uhs campus for an all-night supervised graduation party students enjoy games activities food music and dancing until early morning

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 65% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 63% for direct work, and 37% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 65
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 53
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 61.3%; rating input score 61
  • Program expense ratio: 71.4%; rating input score 71

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 14.2%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.38; rating input score 52; 52nd 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: -24.6% per year; rating input score 0; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -7.3% per year; rating input score 0; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0.1% per year; rating input score 0; 38th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 61.3% of revenue deployed · 71.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 4 filed program accomplishments · $37K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2018 to 2022
  • 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 — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 52/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.