Girls Gotta Run Foundation Incorporated

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
711004251
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2023, Form 990-N 2012
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2022446354
Rating
61
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$255,145
Expenses
$207,784
Assets
$166,600
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Blaine Kebede (Executive Director)
  • Arbora Johnson (Executive Director half year, Trustee)

Highest reported compensation

  • Blaine Kebede (Executive Director): $26,079 total reported compensation
  • Arbora Johnson (Executive Director half year, Trustee): $22,900 total reported compensation
  • Rosie Rodriguez (Part Time Development Director): $12,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Girls Gotta Run invests in Ethiopian girls (and their mothers) who use running and education to empower themselves and their communities in Ethiopia.

What it reported doing in 2024

GGRF programs focus on four key investment strategies for girls and their mothers: education, running for leadership, life skills and savings and entrepreneurship. Girls Gotta Run worked with 200 girls and 140 women in 2024, impacting the lives of more than 1,600 girls, women and family members across two Ethiopian communities - Bekoji and Soddo. Grants of $29,242 were made to our Soddo program to support 100 girls and 60 mothers in Soddo. Grants of $39,667 were made to our partner organization Siqqee Women's Development Association (SWDA) for 100 girls and 80 mothers in Bekoji.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 98% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 51% for direct work, and 49% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - Most voting board members are independent and revenue has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 56
  • Transparency & Controls: 50
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 55
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 56%; rating input score 56
  • Program expense ratio: 67.7%; rating input score 68
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5.41 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Limited
    • Conducts field audits: Limited
    • May suspend future funding: Limited
    • Requires financial reports: Limited
    • Conducts site visits: Limited
    • Requires grant agreements: Limited
    • May require repayment: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 0%; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 18.6%; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.8; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 29.3%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1.2% per year; rating input score 0; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.4% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.6% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 56% of revenue deployed · 67.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $141K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $26K · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 29 of 31 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2019 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • 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: Mission deployment rate scored 56/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 24/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 35/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 11/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.