Winter Springs High School Band Boosters Association Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
593735210
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2009–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2024
Location
Winter Spgs, FL, USA
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Reported finances

Revenue
$90,291
Expenses
$29,857
Assets
$93,078

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Michael Hancock (President)
  • Carolyn Fuchs (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Michael Hancock (President)
  • Carolyn Fuchs (Vice President)
  • Natalie Jackson (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 encourage promote and maintain a non-profit organization which will provide logistical and financial support of the various educational programs and activities of the Winter Springs High School Band. The band is considered to include the instrumentalists and auxiliary unit. To support the band director the school administration and other school and community organizations.

What it reported doing in 2025

Supported the marching band and color guard performances at Winter Springs High Schools home and away football games for 126 high school students. We provided water jugs string backpacks visors and a marching band uniform to all students. We provided first aid and a loudspeaker to assist at bi-weekly rehearsals and also provided a meal option on Friday afternoons. Students were also provided with marching drill and music for the season. All transportation to and from away games was also provided as well as moving trucks to transport large instruments and percussion items.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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

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 some filed totals do not add up.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 63
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 73
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 40.5%; rating input score 41
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 66.9%; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.12; rating input score 75; 75th 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: -1.9% per year; rating input score 0; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.5% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 40.5% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 5 filed program accomplishments · $37K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 7 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2009 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 41/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III program expenses within total did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.