Association of Writers & Writing Programs

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
050314999
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Norfolk, VA, USA
Phone
2406967700
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,181,519
Expenses
$3,656,814
Assets
$5,015,978
Liabilities
$664,329

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

Leadership & pay

21 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CYNTHIA SHERMAN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (THRU AUG))
  • MICHELLE AIELLI (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (BEG MID-SEPT))

Highest reported compensation

  • CYNTHIA SHERMAN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (THRU AUG)): $141,204 total reported compensation
  • M ANNETTE BOUSQUET (DIRECTOR OF FINANCE AND OPERATIONS): $127,671 total reported compensation
  • MICHELLE AIELLI (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (BEG MID-SEPT)): $46,052 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Awp provides support, advocacy, resources, and community to writers, college & university creative writing programs, and writing organizations.

What it reported doing in 2024

Membership services: awp offers three types of memberships to serve our wide range of professional writers, students, educators, and more. The individual membership serves any individual who desires access to writing resources, programming, and events that awp provides. The academic membership serves creative writing programs at degree-granting accredited universities, colleges, and high schools. And the writing organization membership serves writing organizations that provide educational writing programming and events outside of academia.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 92% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 77
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 29
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 90.9%; rating input score 91
  • Program expense ratio: 77.8%; rating input score 78
  • Fundraising efficiency: $1.31 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 3; 3rd 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: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -14.9%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.37; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.13; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8.6%; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1.5% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.1% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.9% per year; rating input score 100; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 90.9% of revenue deployed · 77.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $2.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $141K · 21 people listed
  • Consistency: 34 of 34 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 3/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 9/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 48/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 35/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 53/100.