Girls on the Run Serving Maricopa & Pinal Counties

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
200968314
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2011
Location
Scottsdale, AZ, USA
Phone
6027956572
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Girls Clubs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$592,191
Expenses
$596,763
Assets
$488,475
Liabilities
$160,086

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Lauren Bounds- (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Meagan Kukowski (Executive Dir.): $70,120 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

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

What it reported doing in 2025

Girls on the Run serving Maricopa & Pinal Counties is a life-changing physical activity-based positive youth development program for 3rd - 8th grade girls. Participants develop and improve competence, feel confidence in who they are, develop strength of character, respond to others and oneself with care, create positive connections with peers and adults and make a meaningful contribution to community and society. Each session is led by trained volunteer coaches that guide and mentor the girls. The 10-week program concludes with all participants completing a celebratory 5k event which gives them a tangible sense of achievement as well as a framework for setting and achieving life goals. In 2025 we were honored to serve 1,350 local girls and their families.

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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 65
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 30
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 72%; rating input score 72
  • Program expense ratio: 71.5%; rating input score 71
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.71 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; 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; 64th 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: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -0.8%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.82; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.33; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 11.8%; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.5% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.5% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.6% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 72% of revenue deployed · 71.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $426K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $70K · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 28 of 29 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2015 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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 11/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 28/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 37/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 18/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 32/100.