Austin Junior Forum Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237352288
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Austin, TX, USA
Phone
5124720779
Rating
58
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Federated Giving Programs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$88,857
Expenses
$62,835
Assets
$535,593
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Cyndi Christenson (President)

People named in this filing

  • Cyndi Christenson (President)
  • Camryn Christenson (Secretary)
  • Mary Champagne (Treasurer)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Austin Junior Forum, Inc. is a volunteer organization supporting women, children, and the elderly in the Austin area through community service and fund raising.

What it reported doing in 2025

Austin Junior Forum, Inc. (AJF) served the community in many different ways from hands-on community service to raising funds and providing grants. AJF members volunteer with several local organizations serving the community. AJF also engages in community service projects of its own, including its Teddy Bear Program, which provides stuffed Teddy Bears and Dalmatians for local public safety agencies to give to children involved in traumatic events.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 79% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

MIXED - 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: 36
  • Transparency & Controls: 87
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 69
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 29.1%; rating input score 29
  • Program expense ratio: 38.5%; rating input score 39
  • Fundraising efficiency: $18.64 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 86.7%; rating input score 87; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 29.3%; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 8.52; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -16.9% per year; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -7.6% per year; rating input score 0; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.5% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 29.1% of revenue deployed · 38.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $24K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 19 of 20 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 29/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 39/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.