International Womens Forum Arizona
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 880758156
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2024–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2023
- Location
- Phoenix, AZ, USA
- Phone
- 6027532251
- Rating
- 68
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Professional Societies, Associations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $67,108
- Expenses
- $61,632
- Assets
- $37,021
- Liabilities
- $16,125
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
11 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JoAnn Holland (President)
People named in this filing
- JoAnn Holland (President)
- Adelaida Severson (Director)
- Gaby Cardenas (Secretary)
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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
IWF Arizona brings together individuals with a common professional interest to advance educational, charitable, and community goals by enhancing and supporting women leaders in Arizona to build better leadership across the state, careers, and cultures by connecting accomplished women both locally, statewide, nationally and globally.
What it reported doing in 2024
In 2024, the organization held 7 meetings and events attended by accomplished women from Arizona, including executives, government leaders, nonprofit leaders, and luminaries from the academy, arts and sciences, to create an expansive network of support.
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
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 89% 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. 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: 52
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 46
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 50.6%; rating input score 51
- Program expense ratio: 55.1%; rating input score 55
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 8.2%; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.6; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.44; rating input score 10; 10th 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: 50.6% of revenue deployed · 55.1% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $34K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 11 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 51/100.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 55/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 34/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 59/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 10/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.