Dupage Association of Women Lawyers

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
301050845
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2023–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2022
Location
Oak Brook, IL, USA
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$57,656
Expenses
$39,456
Assets
$41,844
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ANDREA COLLINS (PRESIDENT)
  • NATALIE LAMPHIER (FIRST VICE PRESIDENT)
  • GABBY ANTONIOLLI (SECOND VICE PRESIDENT)
  • STEPHANIE KOPLASKI (THIRD VICE PRESIDENT)
  • MEGAN GIESELER (IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • ANDREA COLLINS (PRESIDENT)
  • NATALIE LAMPHIER (FIRST VICE PRESIDENT)
  • GABBY ANTONIOLLI (SECOND VICE PRESIDENT)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

The dupage association of women lawyers has been an active community organization since 1980, acting as a venue for collaboration amongst lawyers and judges, primarily in the dupage county area.

What it reported doing in 2024

The organization strives annually to promote the acceleration of female attorneys in the workplace and in the community. To achieve this goal, the organization has undertaken the following activities in the past, present and future: fall networking event, scholarship program, continuing legal education seminar (cle), holiday dinner and raffle fundraiser, girl scouts project law track program, talent show, judges' reception, installation dinner, past president's luncheon, and cross-bar events.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 71% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 67
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 31.6%; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.06; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -10.2% per year; rating input score 0; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.1% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2023 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.

  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 48/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.