Hillsborough Association for Women Lawyers Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
593115398
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
Tampa, FL, USA
Phone
8134000229
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$60,372
Expenses
$59,287
Assets
$30,161
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MARY LOU CUELLAR-STILO (PRESIDENT (BEGIN 7/1/25))
  • STARR BROOKINS (PRESIDENT (THROUGH 6/30/25))
  • ALEXA LARKIN (PAST PRESIDENT (THROUGH 6/30/25))

People named in this filing

  • MARY LOU CUELLAR-STILO (PRESIDENT (BEGIN 7/1/25))
  • STARR BROOKINS (PRESIDENT (THROUGH 6/30/25))
  • SHAINA THORPE (TREASURER)

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 hillsborough association for women lawyers, inc. ("hawl") goals and objectives include:- promoting and recognizing the contributions of women in the legal profession and judiciary. - enhancing quality-of-life issues for our membership. - providing peer support for our membership. - engaging in collaborative efforts both within hawl and with other organizations to enhance leadership opportunities, provide educational programs, and facilitate fellowship with other women's organizations.- be an advocate and lobby for equal treatment of lawyers, litigants and witnesses.

What it reported doing in 2025

Member and board lunches to promote networking opportunities for the members and to provide an avenue for discussion of member's problems and goals.

Operating model

Revenue model
Membership-supported. 68% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 93% 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 program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 58
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 46
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 57.9%; rating input score 58
  • Program expense ratio: 58.8%; rating input score 59

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 1.8%; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.51; rating input score 32; 32nd 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: 3.6% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.2% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1.5% per year; rating input score 0; 32nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 57.9% of revenue deployed · 58.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $35K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 1 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • 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 58/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 59/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 48/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 32/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.