Armenian Women's Welfare Association Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
300254355
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Jamaica Plain, MA, USA
Phone
6175222600
Rating
65
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Single Organization Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$638,841
Expenses
$762,240
Assets
$25,974,260
Liabilities
$46,320

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • WENDY SEGREST (PRESIDENT)
  • MANNEH SHARIS GHAZARIANS (CO-VICE PRESIDENT)
  • ALYSSA ANNA YENIKOMSHIAN (CO-VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • WENDY SEGREST (PRESIDENT)
  • MANNEH SHARIS GHAZARIANS (CO-VICE PRESIDENT)
  • ALYSSA ANNA YENIKOMSHIAN (CO-VICE PRESIDENT)

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

To improve the quality of life for elders locally and internationally, including the armenian community, through aid, relief and / or education, changing as the needs of the communities awwa services change.

What it reported doing in 2024

Established in 1915, the armenian women's welfare association (awwa) is a non-profit membership organization which is the sole corporate member of the armenian nursing and rehabilitation center (anrc), an 83-bed skilled nursing and rehabilitation center, located in the jamaica plain neighborhood of boston. It has achieved an overall high quality rating from the centers for medicare and medicaid services (cms) for many years. It also fully sponsors the hanganak elder care program and clinic, a nongovernmental organization ("NGO") in stepanakert and askeran, republic of artsakh. The program provides medicine and social services, and food and fuel support, as well as visiting nurse services for non-ambulatory individuals. This program assists over 300 elderly people living alone in the region of artsakh. The effort to reach the neediest individuals continues despite the azerbaijan-artsakh war in the region.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 92% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 98% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - Most voting board members are independent and the filed numbers largely add up. 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: 47
  • Transparency & Controls: 63
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 52
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 56.1%; rating input score 56
  • Program expense ratio: 46.3%; rating input score 46
  • Fundraising efficiency: $0.33 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Limited
    • Conducts field audits: Limited
    • May suspend future funding: Limited
    • Requires financial reports: Limited
    • Conducts site visits: Limited
    • Requires grant agreements: Limited
    • May require repayment: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 21.7%; rating input score 22; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -19.3%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 34.08; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.1% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.5% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.9% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 56.1% of revenue deployed · 46.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 7 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $353K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 30 of 31 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 56/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 46/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 22/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 2/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 10/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.