American Assoc of University Women St Paul College Club Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
410719838
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
St Paul, MN, USA
Phone
6512274477
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$374,410
Expenses
$286,878
Assets
$1,943,298
Liabilities
$168,830

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

32 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SHARON KLUMPP (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • SHARON KLUMPP (PRESIDENT)
  • BRIAN QUIST (VP OPERATION)
  • JAN BARKER (BRANCH SECRE)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The purpose of the branch is to unite graduates of regionally accredited educational institutions in order to promote equity, education, intellectual growth, individual worth and development of opportunities for women and girls. The branch participates on development and promotion of aauw policies and programs through study, action and pubic advocacy in areas related to its purpose, including community, cultural interests, education and international relations; promotes positive societal change in the community; and cooperates in aauw state and regional work. There are approximately 315 members. The branch holds weekly seminars for members september through may.

What it reported doing in 2024

Programs and education the st. Paul branch members select topics to be studied throughout the year and include a wide range of issues including democracy, immigration, environmental interest and economics among other issues. Committees prepare by asking speakers or presenters to give a presentation. Planning takes place months in advance of the program itself. A bulletin is published with the titles, brief descriptions of the programs and the times of the programs. The seminars are held weekly on tuesdays and the average attendance is approximately 110 members. In addition, the branch periodically holds evening seminars.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 77% for direct work, and 23% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 49
  • Transparency & Controls: 87
  • Accountability: 80
  • Sustainability: 72
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 43.6%; rating input score 44
  • Program expense ratio: 44.3%; rating input score 44
  • Fundraising efficiency: $100.84 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 93.1%; rating input score 93; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 96.9%; rating input score 97; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 23.4%; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 6.77; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.09; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -4% per year; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1% per year; rating input score 100; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.5% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 43.6% of revenue deployed · 44.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 31 of 32 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $127K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 32 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 27 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 filed related-organization links
  • 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 44/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 44/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 27/100.