Girls Who Print Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 331946384
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2025–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2024
- Location
- St Petersburg, FL, USA
- Phone
- 7273298520
- Rating
- 60
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $103,381
- Expenses
- $61,506
- Assets
- $44,724
- Liabilities
- $2,844
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
3 people listed
People named in this filing
- DEBORAH CORN (EXECUTIVE DI)
- KELLY MALLOZZI (VP OF PROGRA)
- PATRICIA MCGREW (MANAGING DIR)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The organization is organized exclusively for charitable, educational, and scientific purposes under section 501(c)(3) of the internal revenue code. The organization's mission is to offer impactful education, vital career development, and unwavering support for women in the printing and graphic arts industries. Our work empowers women to thrive and excel in print and print-adjacent professions. We are committed to building a supportive community celebrating women's contributions to the industry and encouraging new talent to pursue print careers. Through education, events, networking, and mentorship, we provide opportunities and visibility to foster personal and professional growth. Girls who print ensures that women in print have a strong voice and a bright future.
What it reported doing in 2025
The organization supported events at global print events at fespa in germany, labelexpo in barcelona, print4all in milan, and in the us at printing united, dscoop, and pia events through out the country. Our grant awardee for 2025 was girls who print west africa, who we awarded a 10000 usd grant. This covered some expenses for the printher conference 2025.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 86% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 75% for direct work, and 25% for grants.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 48
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 60
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 37.9%; rating input score 38
- Program expense ratio: 63.8%; rating input score 64
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 40.5%; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.73; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 25.2%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 37.9% of revenue deployed · 63.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $39K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 38/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 49/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 14/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 24/100.