Girls on the Run of the Grand Valley

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
830342620
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2020
Location
Grand Junction, CO, USA
Phone
9702579267
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Amateur Sports

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$437,460
Expenses
$372,132
Assets
$359,722
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Emily Moen Eastham (Executive Director)
  • Sarah Hassell (Vice President)
  • Lisa Graznak (President)
  • Shannon Markley (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Emily Moen Eastham (Executive Director): $55,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

An inclusive and empowering enrichment program for young girls to learn whole-body health & foundational life skills through curriculum, utilizing Positive Youth Development and Social Emotional Learning strategies, while incorporating running and physical activity.

What it reported doing in 2024

The girls on the run continued to serve girls across Western Colorado, Eastern Utah, and Northern New Mexico, with 1,801 girls served across 102 sites.

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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 71
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 56
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 73%; rating input score 73
  • Program expense ratio: 85.4%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.83 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • 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: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 14.9%; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.97; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 14.8%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.1% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 14.1% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 26.7% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 73% of revenue deployed · 85.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $318K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $55K · 9 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 23 of 24 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2019 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 17/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 40/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 24/100.