Impact 100 of the Greater Chesapeake Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
384018628
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2019–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
Annapolis, MD, USA
Phone
2024314255
Rating
86
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public Foundations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$55,016
Expenses
$215,904
Assets
$22,085

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Sarah Amyot (President)
  • Emily Owens Channell (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Sarah Amyot (President)
  • Emily Owens Channell (Vice President)
  • Danielle Stump (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

IMPACT 100 Greater Chesapeake is an all-volunteer women's philanthropic community dedicated to improving lives in Anne Arundel County, Maryland by collectively funding transformational grants to local nonprofit organizations.

What it reported doing in 2025

Awarded a $56k grant to local nonprofit "Open Hands of MD" to support food security work. Paid out prior year funds awarded to Annapolis Symphony Academy. Participated in a day of service with local nonprofit "Blue Ribbon Project." Launched "Next Chapter Book Club." Hosted and participated in additional events supporting local nonprofits, learning, and networking.

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 99
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 12
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 97.7%; rating input score 98

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -292.4%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.1; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 19.1% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -4.2% per year; rating input score 0; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 97.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $211K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2019 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.

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 4/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 13/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.