Vhs Indians Lacrosse Booster Club Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
821612356
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2024–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2023
Location
Nokomis, FL, USA
Rating
85
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and Fund Distribution

Reported finances

Revenue
$61,898
Expenses
$57,964
Assets
$46,110

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

Leadership & pay

2 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • David Crane (President)

People named in this filing

  • David Crane (President)
  • Eric Bolen (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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To support and enhance the Venice High School boys lacrosse program by providing equipment transportation meals team events apparel and other resources that promote student-athlete participation development teamwork and sportsmanship.

What it reported doing in 2025

Supported the Venice High School boys lacrosse program by funding equipment team apparel transportation meals the season banquet and other team activities. These expenditures enabled student-athletes to participate safely in practices games and team-building activities while promoting teamwork discipline sportsmanship and athletic development.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 84% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Revenue has declined or grown slowly and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 94
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 45
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 91.3%; rating input score 91
  • Program expense ratio: 97.5%; rating input score 98

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 6.4%; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.8; rating input score 42; 42nd 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: 200% per year; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -24.9% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.9% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 91.3% of revenue deployed · 97.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $57K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 2 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2024 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.

  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 55/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 42/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.