Girls on the Run Puget Sound

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
841618574
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Seattle, WA, USA
Phone
2065282118
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Recreation& Sports N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$910,346
Expenses
$864,604
Assets
$677,437
Liabilities
$7,114

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ANDREA GOMES MORRISON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • KRISTI HERRIOTT (PRESIDENT)
  • ASHLEY DAVIES (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • ANDREA GOMES MORRISON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $110,630 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 provides all girls with a safe and welcoming space that supports social, emotional, and physical well-being. In particular, girls on the run programming provides meaningful mentorship and connection, teaches communication skills, encourages goal setting, and offers fun, non-competitive physical activity. Over 60% of our participants request financial aid; last spring, girls on the run awarded over $257,500 in scholarships and distributed $16,877 in athletic shoes and sports hijabs to participants in need. We strive to be a welcoming, accessible community program, and have never turned away a participant due to an inability to pay fees. We envision a world where every girl knows and activates her limitless potential and is free to boldly pursue her dreams.

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

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: 73
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 45
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 77.3%; rating input score 77
  • Program expense ratio: 80.3%; rating input score 80
  • Fundraising efficiency: $7.22 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 22nd 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: 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: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 5%; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.78; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12.8%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.7% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.6% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 77.3% of revenue deployed · 80.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $694K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $111K · 16 people listed
  • Consistency: 27 of 28 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 15 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 28/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 50/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 35/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 28/100.