Junior League of the Woodlands Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
760063566
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
The Woodlands, TX, USA
Phone
2813765754
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$832,671
Expenses
$815,058
Assets
$2,535,968
Liabilities
$285,279

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • RACHEL GOODLAD (PRESIDENT)
  • JESSICA HUXEL (PRESIDENT-ELECT)
  • SHANNON REGAN (PRESIDENT-ELECT-ELECT)
  • KRISTEN FIELD (MEMBERSHIP VICE PRESIDENT)
  • AMBER NIEMEYER (FINANCE VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • RACHEL GOODLAD (PRESIDENT)
  • JESSICA HUXEL (PRESIDENT-ELECT)
  • SHANNON REGAN (PRESIDENT-ELECT-ELECT)

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 league promotes women's leadership and meaningful community impact through volunteer action, collaboration, education and direct programming and financial assistance. The league's community programs focus on education, food insecurity, literacy and health & well-being.

What it reported doing in 2024

See schedule o the league's community assistance and support services address problems through direct financial assistance and the training of league volunteers. The community programs address a variety of critical needs in areas of child abuse, human-trafficking, education, health, and nutrition. This year, the league volunteers and additional league work of another 6,000 hours for meetings and other league work to aid in the community work and also contributed 17,000 volunteer hours to these community programs. Examples of the league's community programs include donating books into the aldine community, providing hundreds of educators with the opportunity to earn four cpe credits, providing events and mentoring with human trafficking survivors as well as training events for trafficking awareness, providing woman-power hours for numerous local non-profits through our done in a day volunteer services sector, providing children and teenage bags in local hospitals for er visits; offering an appreciation luncheon for local cps case workers; launching a successful supply drive for the local rainbow room with items for baby and child necessities; delivering over seven thousand backpacks filled with food every month to local schools in effort to fight food insecurity; providing thousands of personal hygiene items to local schools to combat period poverty; and so much more.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 77% for direct work, and 23% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 77
  • Accountability: 94
  • Sustainability: 56
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 81%; rating input score 81
  • Program expense ratio: 76%; rating input score 76
  • Fundraising efficiency: $259.56 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 45.5%; rating input score 45; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 86
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 2.1%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.11; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.11; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 12% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.2% per year; rating input score 100; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.8% per year; rating input score 100; 47th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 81% of revenue deployed · 76% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 6 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $619K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 16 people listed
  • Consistency: 34 of 35 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 4 filed related-organization links
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 45/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 42/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Audit committee oversight not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 41/100.