Girls on the Run of Coastal Georgia

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
261181253
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2020
Forms available
Form 990 2020, Form 990-EZ 2012, Form 990-N 2011
Location
Savannah, GA, USA
Phone
9123491528
Rating
65
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Delinquency Prevention

Reported finances

Revenue
$117,229
Expenses
$118,624
Assets
$61,850
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

2 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • LEAH KESSLER (Executive Dir.): $45,731 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Missions: We inspire girls to be joyful, healthy and confident using a fun, experience-based curriculum which creatively integrates running.The Girls on the Run curricula, the heart of the program, provides pre-adolescent girls with the necessary tools to embrace their individual strengths and successfully navigate life experiences making healthy choices.Our character education program is transformation for young girls. Research has clearly shown that beginning at age eight, girls begin to become particularly vulnerable to outside influences. The Girls on the Run program counters this vulnerability by providing positive, healthy outside influences. Young girls today are influenced by unrealistic and often unhealthy images in the media. They see and hear things that they are not always able to process. Girls on the Run offers education, activities, dedicated time and positive adult influences to counter these images. We help girls determine who they are and encourage them to embrace the

What it reported doing in 2020

Our established curriculum delivered by trained, enthusiastic volunteers gives the girls the opportunity to receive honest encouragement, interact with strong role models while engaging in fun activities, share healthy snacks, and participate in physical exercise on a regular basis. The program is implemented over twice weekly sessions for ten weeks. At each session the girls receive a lesson from the GOTR curricula and participate in activities designed to enhance their understanding of the lesson. Each lesson includes a workout designed to help the girls achieve their goal of running the 5k at the end of the program. Girls on the Run offer fall and spring programs during the school year.****THE CORONAVIRUS PANDEMIC HAD A TREMENDOUS IMPACT ON THE GOTR PROGRAM NATIONWIDE. SERVICES WERE DISRUPTED AND OFFERED VIRTUALLY AND IN PERSON WHEN POSSIBLE. REVENUES WERE DOWN NATIONWIDE.****

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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: 48
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 32
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 52.9%; rating input score 53
  • Program expense ratio: 52.3%; rating input score 52
  • Fundraising efficiency: $2.39 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 7; 7th 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: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Limited
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -1.2%; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.52; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 38.6%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -4.1% per year; rating input score 0; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.5% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 23.5% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 52.9% of revenue deployed · 52.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $62K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $46K · 2 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2015 to 2020
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 53/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 52/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 7/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 32/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 19/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 9/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.