Girls on the Run Memphis

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
824980215
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2023, Form 990-N 2017
Location
Memphis, TN, USA
Phone
9018480054
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Youth Development Programs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$263,476
Expenses
$190,366
Assets
$200,292
Liabilities
$17,610

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Tracee Ridley-Pryor (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Joanna Lipman (Executive Dir.): $62,843 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

We inspire girls to be joyful, healthy and confident using a fun, experience-based curriculum which creatively integrates running.

What it reported doing in 2024

GIRLS ON THE RUN GOTR MEMPHIS DIRECTLY SERVES ITS COMMUNITY BY DELIVERING after-school youth development programs for 3rd-8th grade girls in public, private, and charter schools, community centers and parks across the city of Memphis and Shelby and Fayette counties. In FY 24, Girls on the Run Memphis offered its 10-week program in both the Fall 24 and Spring 25. Over 315 girls participated in Girls on the Runs programming during the 2024-2025 school year, with110 trained volunteers facilitating the program across 15 program sites. Both Girls on the Run program seasons culminated in a community wide celebratory 5K event- involving approximately 300 volunteers and close to 800 additional race participants.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 79% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 64
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 63
  • Sustainability: 55
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 59.1%; rating input score 59
  • Program expense ratio: 81%; rating input score 81
  • Fundraising efficiency: $11.09 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 19th 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: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 27.7%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.05; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.09; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 33%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 16.5% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 25% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 59.1% of revenue deployed · 81% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 1 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $154K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $63K · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 25 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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 59/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 42/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 42/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 9/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 27/100.