International Association of Women Police Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
510200042
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2018
Location
Anchorage, AK, USA
Phone
9072407155
Rating
45
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Law Enforcement

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,538,391
Expenses
$853,080
Assets
$1,031,104
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DEBORAH FRIEDL (PRESIDENT UNTIL 92024)
  • JANE TOWNSLEY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR UNTIL 92024)
  • MYRA JAMES (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • JULIA JAEGER (PRESIDENT)
  • LEAH MOFOMME (SECOND VICE PRESIDENT UNTIL 92024)
  • IDA OETARI POERNAMASASI (THIRD VICE PRESIDENT UNTIL 92024)

Highest reported compensation

  • DEBORAH FRIEDL (PRESIDENT UNTIL 92024): $13,100 total reported compensation
  • JULIE-DEE SHARKEY (TREASURER): $6,000 total reported compensation
  • CANDACE ACKLER (RECORDING SECRETARY UNTIL 92024): $1,500 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To strengthen, unite, and raise the capacity of women in policing internationally.

What it reported doing in 2024

Increase professionalism in police work, further the utilization of women in law enforcement/police services, and provide a forum for approximately 1200 members to share in development of police administration. The 2024 conference served 790 attendees, and the 2024 regional training served 175 attendees.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 95% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. 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: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 81
  • Accountability: 68
  • Sustainability: 75
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 2nd 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: No; rating input score 0

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: 44.5%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.21; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.6%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -63.2% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 24.1% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 14.5% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 14 board members independent · 3 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $13K · 14 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 11 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2019 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 9 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 49/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.