League of Women Voters of Arizona Education Fund

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
742390846
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2021–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2019
Location
Phoenix, AZ, USA
Phone
4802356630
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$60,174
Expenses
$35,904
Assets
$428,900
Liabilities
$100

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MARCIA BARRY (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • BARBARA CRICKETT MITCHELL (DIRECTOR)
  • ELLIE LAUMARK (SECRETARY)
  • EMILY BRIDSON (DIRECTOR)

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

Provision of voter education and voter registration services

What it reported doing in 2025

Created a nonpartisan voter guide on elections, candidates, and ballot measures, published on the lwv education fund's vote 411.org website. Promoted this resource widely through print, social media, freeway bilboards, movie theatres, public service radio and television spots, and print ads in local newspapers.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Revenue has declined or grown slowly and liabilities are high compared with assets.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 75
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 78
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 59.7%; rating input score 60
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 40.3%; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 11.95; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 12.9% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -2.8% per year; rating input score 0; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 25.5% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 59.7% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 4 filed program accomplishments · $36K 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: 5 filing years from 2021 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 31/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.