Junior League of Hampton Roads Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
540566800
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Newport News, VA, USA
Phone
7578730281
Rating
48
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Women's Service Clubs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$61,261
Expenses
$56,835
Assets
$574,915
Liabilities
$31,736

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • AUTUMN EPLER (PRESIDENT)
  • KIM MINGEE (PRESIDENT-ELECT)
  • MEGAN DURAN (MEMBERSHIP VICE PRESIDENT)
  • AMANDA ROSE (COMMUNICATIONS VICE PRESIDENT)
  • REGAN VAN CURA (FINANCE VICE PRESIDENT)
  • NIKKI PAGE (COMMUNITY VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • AUTUMN EPLER (PRESIDENT)
  • KIM MINGEE (PRESIDENT-ELECT)
  • EMELIE GUNN (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. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The junior league of hampton roads is an organization of women whose mission is to advance women's leadership for meaningful community impact through volunteer action, collaboration, and training. Its purpose is exclusively educational and charitable.

What it reported doing in 2024

Community initiatives - projects which focus on community service which require league funds and volunteers. All initiatives chosen are approved by the board of directors and the membership.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Multi-channel. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 16% for direct work, 37% for grants, and 47% for affiliated organizations.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 41
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 6
  • Sustainability: 58
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 45.6%; rating input score 46
  • Program expense ratio: 30.5%; rating input score 31
  • Fundraising efficiency: $8.35 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 7.2%; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 10.12; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -9.2% per year; rating input score 0; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -6.7% per year; rating input score 0; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0.1% per year; rating input score 0; 39th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 45.6% of revenue deployed · 30.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 10 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $17K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 43 of 43 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 46/100.
  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 31/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 50/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 21/100.