Phoenixville Womens Outreach

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
472270202
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2016, Form 990-N 2015
Location
Phoenixville, PA, USA
Phone
4843028151
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Temporary Housing

Reported finances

Revenue
$220,134
Expenses
$194,557
Assets
$811,820
Liabilities
$3,750

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Erin Powrie (Board Member & President)
  • Laura Edling (Board Member & Vice President)
  • Andrea Blue (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Andrea Blue (Executive Director): $50,034 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Phoenixville Womens Outreach empowers women to self-sufficiency, stability, and independence by providing a comprehensive transitional housing program, affordable housing, supportive services, advocacy and education.

What it reported doing in 2024

Provide food and shelter for homeless women in Phoenixville, Chester County PA. As part of the program these women were provided with the following support programs: Nutrition & Cooking classes, Mental & Emotional Fitness programs including stress and anger management, Financial Literacy, Budget Management, Matching Savings program, Spiritual program, Communication & Relationship Building classes, Career Development Program and Mentoring.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 78% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 98% 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 70
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 60
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 69.5%; rating input score 69
  • Program expense ratio: 77.5%; rating input score 77
  • Fundraising efficiency: $15.54 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 11.6%; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.17; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 25.7%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 14.2% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.2% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 14.2% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 69.5% of revenue deployed · 77.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $151K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $50K · 11 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 25 of 26 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2017 to 2024
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 51/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 14/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 50/100.