Girls for a Change

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
260035835
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2022
Forms available
Form 990 2022
Location
Richmond, VA, USA
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Girls Clubs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,083,239
Expenses
$1,210,082
Assets
$761,333
Liabilities
$348,661

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ANGELA PATTON (CEO)
  • JENNIFER WILLIAMSON (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • MAUREEN JULES PEREZ (BOARD PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • ANGELA PATTON (CEO): $85,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Girls for a change is a national organization that empowers girls to create social change. We invite young women to design, lead, fund and implement social change projects that tackle issues girls face in their own neighborhoods.

What it reported doing in 2022

Gfc provides the tools, resources, partnerships and support girls need to gain the voice, ability, and problem-solving capacity to realize their full potential. We welcome and serve all girls and focus our efforst on girls who live in low income communites.our programs: girl action teams: thousands of girls have the opportunity to participate in community teams. The girls identify challenges in their communities and design and implement creative solutions to address them as a team. Each team has two women coashes to guide and support the girls though the project. This is a free after school program.change your world trainings: starting in 2008, gfc took its annual girl summit, a day long conference on the road. Each year 2,500+ girls and 400 women are given the tools to create change in their community through our change your world trainings. The trainings also include teaching girls what social change is and showing girls examples of social change makers how gfc benefits girls: in completing the gfc program, girls will gain an increase in four areas: self-efficacy (belief in ones personla power to produce and effect)authentic relationships with women volunteers, called coachessocial change skills (critical thinking, problem solving, resource development, and networking)the ability and confidence to express and implement their ideas

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 95% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 54
  • Transparency & Controls: 88
  • Accountability: 81
  • Sustainability: 23
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 60%; rating input score 60
  • Program expense ratio: 53.7%; rating input score 54
  • Fundraising efficiency: $6.83 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 84.6%; rating input score 85; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: -11.7%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.63; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.46; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7%; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 11.3% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.3% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 32.2% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 60% of revenue deployed · 53.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 7 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $650K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $85K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 28 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2012 to 2022
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 54/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 25/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 16/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 27/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule G fundraiser detail did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 18/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 47/100.