Girls on the Run of South Central Wisconsin Incorporated
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 113732108
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2011–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2010, Form 990-N 2007
- Location
- Madison, WI, USA
- Phone
- 6088314687
- Rating
- 85
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Girls Clubs
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $827,271
- Expenses
- $823,695
- Assets
- $440,909
- Liabilities
- $28,955
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
16 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- KIMBERLY NOYCE (President)
Highest reported compensation
- CHRISTINE BENEDICT (Executive Dir.): $104,969 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 on the Run inspires girls to be joyful, healthy and confident using a fun, experience-based curriculum which creatively integrates running. We envision a world where every girl knows and activates her limitless potential and is free to boldly pursue her dreams.
What it reported doing in 2024
In 2024, girls on the run of south central Wisconsin, inc. Served 2,263 participants on 126 teams throughout our 8-county territory. Meeting twice a week in small teams during the spring and fall seasons, girls on the run taught 3-8th grade girls life skills through engaging lessons and fun movement and running activities. The 8-week curriculum was taught by 625 certified girls on the run coaches who helped each girl celebrate her unique strengths and realize her power to change the world. During the program, each team created and executed a local community impact project to demonstrate the unimaginable strength that comes from helping others. Finally, at each seasons conclusion, the girls and their running buddies completed a celebratory 5k 3.1 mile run that gave the girls a tangible sense of achievement and a framework for setting and achieving life goals. In 2024, 1,080 participants received over $162,745 in free or reduced-rate programming. No girl was turned away for an inability to pay for the program.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 76% for direct work, and 24% for grants.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 80
- Transparency & Controls: 94
- Accountability: 90
- Sustainability: 34
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 87%; rating input score 87
- Program expense ratio: 86.3%; rating input score 86
- Fundraising efficiency: $7.2 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 27; 27th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th 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: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 0.4%; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.54; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.07; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 12.7%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 11% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 8.6% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 8.1% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 87% of revenue deployed · 86.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $711K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $105K · 16 people listed
- Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $434K reported
- Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
- 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.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 27/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 37/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 25/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 28/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 48/100.