Yankton High School Athletic Booster

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
300531739
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2020–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
Yankton, SD, USA
Phone
6056603164
Rating
85
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Reported finances

Revenue
$67,439
Expenses
$98,517
Assets
$86,744

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KRISTI TACKE (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • RENEE TERESHINSKI (VICE PRES &)
  • KRISTI TACKE (PRESIDENT)
  • KAREN BYRKELAND (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

The yankton high school athletic booster club, inc. Is organized and operated for charitable and educational purposes. The purposes of the organization include raising funds and purchasing personal property and services to be used by students and faculty of yankton high school, providing volunteers for educational and extracurricular activities, and engaging in other charitable, civic, or educational activities that will contribute to the public education of the community.

What it reported doing in 2025

To support the yankton high school athletic teams.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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. Expenses are high relative to revenue and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 98
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 26
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 93.6%; rating input score 94

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -46.1%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.88; rating input score 44; 44th 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: 5.1% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.9% per year; rating input score 0; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -3.1% per year; rating input score 0; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 93.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $92K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2020 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 13/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 44/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.