National Association of Women in Construction
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 916054681
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2024–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2023
- Location
- Mercer Island, WA, USA
- Rating
- 72
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $82,761
- Expenses
- $39,703
- Assets
- $53,990
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
2 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Mariah David (President)
People named in this filing
- Mariah David (President)
- Claire McPherson (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
NAWIC Puget Sound Chapter 60 is organized exclusively for charitable educational and scientific purposes including for such purposes the making of distributions directly for the conduct of the activities. Specifically the Corporation is organized: 1 to unite for their mutual benefit women who are actively employed in various phases of the construction industry; 2 to encourage cooperation and a better understanding between and among them; 3 to promote fellowship and good will among Members in the Corporation; and 4 to promote education and service to the construction industry. Activities include hosting regular meetings for current and potential members as well as supporting and attending regional and national conferences.
What it reported doing in 2024
NAWIC Puget Sound Amateur Golf Tournament dedicated to introducing women to construction to business networking through golfing knowledge highlighting local charity efforts and raising awareness for women in construction with 98 attendees this year.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filed totals do not add up.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 71
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 66
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 54.4%; rating input score 54
- Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 52%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.36; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 54.4% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $45K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 2 people listed
- Consistency: 7 of 8 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- 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.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 54/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III program expenses within total did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 55/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.