League of Women Voters of Tennessee
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 626051527
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2024–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2023
- Location
- Nashville, TN, USA
- Phone
- 6297775677
- Rating
- 78
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $86,313
- Expenses
- $53,414
- Assets
- $154,363
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
16 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Debra Gould (President)
- Leslie Collum (1st Vice President)
- Barbara Ibarra (2nd Vice President)
People named in this filing
- Debra Gould (President)
- Leslie Collum (1st Vice President)
- Barbara Ibarra (2nd Vice President)
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
The League of Women Voters, a nonpartisan political organization, encourages informed and active participation in government. The League influences public policy through education and advocacy. Activities include voter registration, providing voter information, and poll watching. Other activities include studying public policy issues, providing information to the public on these issues, developing a position on some of these issues based on league principles. and often advocating for these league positions.
What it reported doing in 2024
State level advocacy for League of Women Voters of Tennessee public policy positions, especially issues related to voting and open government. Other issues include education, health care and the environment. Activities include contracting with a lobbyist, alerting members of opportunities to weigh in on issues with legislators, and actively engaging with the legislative process
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 95% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 57% for direct work, and 43% for grants.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 69
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 72
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 56.5%; rating input score 57
- Program expense ratio: 87.5%; rating input score 88
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: 38.1%; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.89; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 56.5% of revenue deployed · 87.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $47K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 16 people listed
- Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
- 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.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 57/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 12/100.