Viper Nation Academic Booster

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
264037064
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2011–2022
Forms available
Form 990 2018, Form 990-EZ 2022, Form 990-N 2010
Location
Austin, TX, USA
Phone
5126873184
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Scholarships, Student Financial Aid Services, Awards

Reported finances

Revenue
$0
Expenses
$1,053
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • William Farrell (President)
  • Contessa Weinheimer (Executive Director)

People named in this filing

  • William Farrell (President)
  • Lynette Seitzler (Secretary)
  • Shauna Upp (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

To stimulate academic excellence for students in Austin's Four Points Community in the areas of Leadership, entrepreneurship, college readiness and STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Math) through private funding.

What it reported doing in 2022

Fostering the growth of leadership, entrepreneurship, science, technology, engineering and math students by providing; - Grant sot public school teachers, administrators or parent organization for student academic programs; - Teacher Development/training grants to support new or established curricula; - Scholarships to Vandegrift High School Students pursuing careers in science, technology, engineering or math; - A transforamation of the library at VHS into a learning commons with new technology; - Naviance, a college readiness program for parents and students; - Community evens to raise funds, visibility and support for VHS

Operating model

Revenue model
No positive adjusted resources. The filing reports no positive adjusted operating resources.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 7
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: Limited
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 2; 2nd 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: -19.7% per year; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -8.8% per year; rating input score 0; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1% per year; rating input score 0; 35th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2011 to 2022
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.