Association of VAWA Administrators

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
273187966
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2017–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
Coconut Creek, FL, USA
Phone
9542997648
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Alliance/Advocacy

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$56,034
Expenses
$68,200
Assets
$173,161

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Tierra Williams (Vice President)
  • Amy Baynes (President)

People named in this filing

  • Tierra Williams (Vice President)
  • Jackie Hoover (Treasurer)
  • Mark Hertweck (Director)

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 and facilitate mutual support, awareness, and cooperation among states and territories administering Violence Against Women Act VAWA formula grant programs and to provide a centralized voice for the advancement of improvements to enhance the effectiveness of VAWA administration.

What it reported doing in 2025

Providing a resource for centralized and timely information to administrators in all 50 states, Washington DC, and five US territories. The Executive Director serves as the one primary contact for members looking for information on grant administration, compliance with VAWA and Association activities.

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
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

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 31
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -21.7%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.54; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 64.5%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1.5% per year; rating input score 0; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -3.8% per year; rating input score 0; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.4% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2017 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 21/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 2/100.