North End Mothers Club Charitable Trust #1156 C/o Wey

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237229901
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2021–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Evanston, IL, USA
Phone
8473206891
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$27,481
Expenses
$14,103
Assets
$231,222
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

  • ELAINE DARER (PRESIDENT)
  • KALEN DANIELS (CO-VICE PRESIDENT)
  • KIM SAGAMI (CO-VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • ELAINE DARER (PRESIDENT)
  • KALEN DANIELS (CO-VICE PRESIDENT)
  • KIM SAGAMI (CO-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 charitable trust was established to ensure a continuing flow of income to support the projects, events, and programs offered each year by the women for evanston youth. As the guardians of the trust we strive to maintain a blend of investments that will augment the fundraisers undertaken by the club.

What it reported doing in 2024

The annual disbursement supports college scholarships for graduating students and underfunded in-school programs at evanston township high school that cater to a broad number of students.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 79% of its reported program spending out as grants.

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 program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 69
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 85
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 51.3%; rating input score 51
  • 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: 48.7%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 16.4; rating input score 95; 95th 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: -3.3% per year; rating input score 0; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 14.6% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.6% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 51.3% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $14K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2021 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 51/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.