Arizona Youth Partnership
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 860669087
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2011–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Tucson, AZ, USA
- Phone
- 5207449595
- Rating
- 87
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Alcohol, Drug Abuse, Prevention Only
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $4,076,362
- Expenses
- $4,070,564
- Assets
- $1,340,045
- Liabilities
- $622,649
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
13 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Anuja Gladish (Chief Executive Officer)
- Dale Fry (President)
- Janell Lloyd (Vice President)
- Dylan Bearce (Past President)
Highest reported compensation
- Anuja Gladish (Chief Executive Officer): $108,102 total reported compensation
- Shirley Lamy (Chief Financial Officer): $96,167 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Arizona youth partnership, (azyp), empowers youth to harness their strengths to live healthy and purposeful lives.
What it reported doing in 2024
AZYP WAS FOUNDED IN 1990 BY A GROUP OF CONCERNED PIMA COUNTY CITIZENS WHO SOUGHT TO PROVIDE RURAL COMMUNITIES IN THE COUNTY ACCESS TO THE SERVICES AVAILABLE IN THE TUCSON METRO AREA. IN 2006, AZYP EXPANDED TO SERVE RURAL COMMUNITIES ACROSS ARIZONA AND NOW SERVES COMMUNITIES IN ALL 15 COUNTIES IN THE STATE. This year we accomplished the following: The Youth Wellness division assisted youth in developing healthy mental, emotional, and physical well-being through education, serving 2,500 youth and adults who support youth in their community. The Youth Services Division supported runaway and homeless youth through housing and wrap-around services while encouraging strong family bonds, serving over 1,000 youth and families. The Community Impact Division worked alongside communities to create safe and supportive environments that improve the quality of life for youth, serving 1,300 youth and community members. Each year, over 10,000 Arizona youth, families, and community members receive AZYP education, support, and services.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Grant-funded. 93% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
- 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 total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 85
- Transparency & Controls: 92
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 28
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 84.2%; rating input score 84
- Program expense ratio: 84.2%; rating input score 84
- Fundraising efficiency: $151.95 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 0.1%; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.33; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.46; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 5%; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 6.6% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 6.6% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 8.1% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 84.2% of revenue deployed · 84.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $3.4M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $108K · 13 people listed
- Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $100K reported
- Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
- 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.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 34/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 11/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 23/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 53/100.