Center for Women in Leadership

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
933106404
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2023
Location
Richmond, TX, USA
Phone
6303302868
Rating
55
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Religion Related N.E.C.
Affiliation
Christianity

Reported finances

Revenue
$201,087
Expenses
$264,886
Assets
$31,359
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Lynn Cohick (President)
  • Kelly Dippolito (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Kelly Dippolito (Executive Director): $55,000 total reported compensation
  • Lynn Cohick (President): $28,500 total reported compensation
  • Sandra Glahn (Secretary): $3,500 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The purpose of the Center for Women in Leadership is to equip women in a context that is biblically rooted theologically robust and ethnically diverse to thrive as leaders in the academy and the church. The Center for Women in Leadership is organized exclusively for charitable religious educational and or scientific purposes including for such purposes the making of distributions to organizations that qualify as exempt organizations under section 501c3 of the Internal Revenue Code or the corresponding section of any future tax code.

What it reported doing in 2024

The Alabaster Jar Podcast: Produce weekly podcast hosted by Dr. Lynn Cohick. Episodes feature biblical teaching and conversations on women in ministry with scholars pastors and leaders.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 58
  • Transparency & Controls: 64
  • Accountability: 48
  • Sustainability: 17
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 72%; rating input score 72
  • Program expense ratio: 54.7%; rating input score 55
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 22
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -31.7%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.12; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 32.8%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 13.5% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -100.9% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 72% of revenue deployed · 54.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 3 board members independent · 2 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $145K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $55K · 5 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 40 of 41 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 55/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 9/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 7/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 9/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.