Boston Women's Fund Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 222475551
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Cambridge, MA, USA
- Phone
- 6177250035
- Rating
- 68
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Public Foundations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $4,911,771
- Expenses
- $2,006,573
- Assets
- $5,227,143
- Liabilities
- $80,466
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
10 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- NATANJA CRAIG OQUENDO (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)
Highest reported compensation
- NATANJA CRAIG OQUENDO (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $223,884 total reported compensation
- ALEXANDRA AUGUSTE (CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER): $137,778 total reported compensation
- BRIANNA BOGGS (DIRECTOR): $48,600 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To support community-based organizations & grassroots initiatives run by women and girls in order to create a society based on racial, economic and social justice. We strive for a world free of racism, poverty, and sexism.
What it reported doing in 2024
The organization provides grants, support and assistance to grassroots women's and girl's projects working for racial, economic, and social justice. The organization supports work on critical issues such as ending racial and gender discrimination, welfare reform, health care, violence prevention, reproductive freedom, homelessness, workplace equity, and economic development. All grantmaking funds are distributed during the summer cycle
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 98% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 56% for direct work, and 44% for grants.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - 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 fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 41
- Transparency & Controls: 84
- Accountability: 88
- Sustainability: 76
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 27.3%; rating input score 27
- Program expense ratio: 62.7%; rating input score 63
- Fundraising efficiency: $13.79 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
- Written employment contract: Pass
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 78.1%; rating input score 78; 21st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 19th 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: Fail
- 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: 59.1%; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.61; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 20.4%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 20.9% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 11.7% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 4.1% per year; rating input score 100; 30th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 27.3% of revenue deployed · 62.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 7 of 8 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $1.3M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $224K · 10 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 30 of 31 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 25 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 21 filed related-organization links
- 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 27/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 48/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Document-retention policy not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 12/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.