League of Women Voters of New Mexico Education Fund

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
874088531
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2024–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2022
Location
Albuquerque, NM, USA
Phone
5057103886
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Voter Education, Registration

Reported finances

Revenue
$64,155
Expenses
$51,427
Assets
$66,218
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Hannah Burling (President)

People named in this filing

  • Hannah Burling (President)
  • Felicia Orth (Secretary)
  • Jeanne Logsdon (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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The primary exempt purpose of the League of Women Voters New Mexico Education Fund is to educate and engage voters during elections and advocate for fair redistricting at the state level.

What it reported doing in 2025

Support for fair redistricting at the state level by organizing a task force and coordinating activities of a number of other organizations and interested individuals.

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 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

STRONG - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 76
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 64
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 69.6%; rating input score 70
  • Program expense ratio: 86.8%; rating input score 87

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 19.8%; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.29; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -50.2% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -29.6% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 21.3% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 69.6% of revenue deployed · 86.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $45K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2024 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 54/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.