League of Women Voters of Missouri Education Fund

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
431344654
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2023–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2022
Location
Saint Louis, MO, USA
Phone
3149616869
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Civil Rights, Social Action, Advocacy N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue
$44,319
Expenses
$35,014
Assets
$150,807
Liabilities
$9,906

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Marilyn McLeod (President)
  • Nancy Copenhaver (Vice President)
  • Jean Dugan (Executive Director)

People named in this filing

  • Marilyn McLeod (President)
  • Nancy Copenhaver (Vice President)
  • Marjorie Bramer (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-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Voter Education and Services

What it reported doing in 2024

Voter Education- supported youth voter initiatives and local League work in Columbia, Kansas City, Joplin, Mexico, Moberly, Springfield, St. Louis, and Northwest Missouri; provided voters with crucial election and voter registration information through radio and social media

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 84% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 95% 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

STRONG - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration and liabilities are high compared with assets.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 64
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 62
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 60.5%; rating input score 60
  • Program expense ratio: 70.3%; rating input score 70

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: 21%; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.31; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.07; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 19.2%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 12.1% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.1% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.8% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 60.5% of revenue deployed · 70.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $25K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2023 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 20/100.