National Association of Women in Construction
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 566085430
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2022–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2021
- Location
- Charlotte, NC, USA
- Phone
- 7045645961
- Rating
- 66
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $58,227
- Expenses
- $42,796
- Assets
- $118,627
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
12 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- ASHLEY TAYLOR (IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT)
- MELANIE EDLING (PRESIDENT)
- EMILY HEIM (VICE PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- DOVE SIFERS-PUTMAN (DIRECTOR)
- STACY FISHER (DIRECTOR)
- RACHAEL HINSON (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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Strengthen and amplify the success of women in the construction industry by providing education, community and advocacy for women.
What it reported doing in 2024
Advocacy: our association is committed to championing women to impact the direction of the construction industry. We provide this through our events offered to the business community with multiple events during women in construction week every year in march. It allows us to reach others outside of our membership to increase membership and show that our organization is advocating for them.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and program spending has declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 54
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 73
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 48.8%; rating input score 49
- Program expense ratio: 63.1%; rating input score 63
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 26.5%; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.77; rating input score 73; 73rd 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 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -7.2% per year; rating input score 0; 31st percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 5.6% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 26.5% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 48.8% of revenue deployed · 63.1% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $27K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 49/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.