Giving a Leg Up Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 332886246
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2025–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025
- Location
- Saratoga Springs, NY, USA
- Phone
- 7742919771
- Rating
- 76
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Half-Way House for Offenders, Ex-Offenders
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $79,490
- Expenses
- $48,190
- Assets
- $31,300
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
3 people listed
People named in this filing
- MICHELLE KEATING (DIRECTOR)
- STEPHANIE BRENNAN (DIRECTOR)
- JAQUI DEMERIC (DIRECTOR)
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 purpose of the organization shall be to provide charitable, educational services to provide women who are or have been incarcerated with vocational training, guidance, and mentoring in equine related fields to enable them to learn a needed skill and earn a meaningful wage and become productive members of society.
What it reported doing in 2025
Giving a leg up's primary program provides reentry support services to women transitioning from incarceration to independent living. The organization offers safe and stable housing, supportive community networks, career placement assistance (including opportunities in equine-related fields), individual counseling, and mentorship and life skills training. These services are designed to promote personal stability, employment, and successful reintegration into society by equipping participants with the resources, support, and skills necessary to rebuild their lives.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of total spending goes to programs. 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: 65
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 66
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 52%; rating input score 52
- Program expense ratio: 85.8%; rating input score 86
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 39.4%; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.65; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 52% of revenue deployed · 85.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $41K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 52/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 37/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.