Brooklyn Womans Club Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
116027294
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Brooklyn, NY, USA
Phone
7183691677
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$16,728
Expenses
$8,505
Assets
$121,333
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Louisa Avanzino (President)
  • Judy Fallon (Vice-President)

People named in this filing

  • Louisa Avanzino (President)
  • Judy Fallon (Vice-President)
  • Mary J Fischer (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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

A dynamic social and service organization which fosters meaningful community relationships, provides charitable contributions to various non-profit groups, and creates a spirit of camaraderie, friendship, entertainment and informational opportunities for members. The mission is accomplished through fun and innovative programs and events.

What it reported doing in 2024

Chocolate and Wine Event - This is the annual fundraiser for the Brooklyn Womans Club Inc. All Club members donate a gift basket to be raffled off at the fundraiser. At the fundraiser raffle tickets are sold and at the end of the evening all winning tickets are randomly selected for each gift basket. For Year 2024, a big ticket raffle for an IPAD PRO was also included at the fundraiser with tickets being sold before and during the fundraiser. The big ticket raffle winner was selected at the end of the evening. An entrance fee for the evening of 20 per person was charged which included wine, soft drinks, chocolate and various charcuterie board selections.

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 98% of its reported program spending out as grants.

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 program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 54
  • Transparency & Controls: 83
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 77
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 52.5%; rating input score 52
  • Program expense ratio: 75.2%; rating input score 75
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 22nd 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: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 49.2%; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 14.27; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -2.1% per year; rating input score 0; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 11.4% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0% per year; rating input score 0; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 52.5% of revenue deployed · 75.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $6K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 17 of 18 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2019 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 52/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.