Girls Inc of the Valley

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
042748244
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Holyoke, MA, USA
Phone
4135326247
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Girls Clubs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,394,602
Expenses
$2,470,006
Assets
$7,069,088
Liabilities
$1,579,281

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

Leadership & pay

26 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SUZANNE PARKER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • SUZANNE PARKER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $131,178 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

See schedule ogirls inc. Of the valley helps transform the lives of girls. Intentionally structured to meet the specific needs of girls, our wide range of programs offer opportunities for girls to increase their capacity for resiliency, foster community involvement, strengthen their capabilities as critical thinkers and inspire lifelong learning. Our programs are girl-centered, community focused, and age-appropriate.

What it reported doing in 2024

Elementary school programs (esp): girls inc.'s programs for girls ages 5-12 are offered at 480 hampden street in holyoke, and through school partnerships in holyoke, springfield, and chicopee. Our programs provide rich educational experiences that help girls reach developmental milestones and succeed in school. While the programs have an academic focus, there is a strong emphasis on social emotional learning as well, building a supportive community of confident, directed girls. Program staff also offered a variety of remote/virtual experiences for participants.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 68% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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 available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 43
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 71
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 39.3%; rating input score 39
  • Program expense ratio: 54%; rating input score 54
  • Fundraising efficiency: $9.01 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 27.2%; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.86; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.22; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.3%; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6% per year; rating input score 100; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.3% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 15% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 39.3% of revenue deployed · 54% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 23 of 23 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $1.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $131K · 26 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $1.1M reported
  • Consistency: 35 of 35 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 39/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 54/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 34/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 41/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 51/100.