Council of Writing Program Administrators Wpa
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 112435587
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2009–2011
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2011
- Location
- Allendale, MI, USA
- Phone
- 6163313411
- Rating
- 54
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Humanities Organizations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $170,882
- Expenses
- $39,752
- Assets
- $169,394
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2011. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
4 people listed
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2011. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The Council of Writing Program Administrators is a national association of college and university faculty with professional responsibilities for (or interests in) directing writing programs. Members include directors of freshman composition, undergraduate writing, WAC/WID/CAC, and writing centers, as well as department chairs, division heads, deans, and so on. WPA publishes a journal and newsletter, holds an annual workshop and conference, makes grants and awards, develops position statements, offers consulting and program evaluation, and fosters extensive discussions about college writing and writing programs. Faculty and graduate students with professional interests in writing program administration are cordially invited to join WPA.
What it reported doing in 2011
The WPA provides competitive research grants to academics for the studying of writing program administration, grants to graduate students to attend the Conference for College Composition and Communication and the WPA Conference, and grants to minorities for attending the WPA Conference.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 89% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 60% of its reported program spending out as grants.
The verdict
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. 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: 30
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 74
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 13.5%; rating input score 13
- Program expense ratio: 57.9%; rating input score 58
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 76.7%; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.26; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: Limited
Growth
- Program expense growth: -80.5% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 15.4% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 50.2% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 13.5% of revenue deployed · 57.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 4 filed program accomplishments · $23K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
- Schedules: 1 filed schedules
- Filing history: 3 filing years from 2009 to 2011
- 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.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 13/100.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 58/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.