Soroptimist International of Saratoga County
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 510243409
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2015–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2024
- Location
- Saratoga Springs, NY, USA
- Rating
- 40
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Protection Against Abuse
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $69,528
- Expenses
- $44,609
- Assets
- $101,789
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
7 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- CYNTHIA ELETTO (PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- CYNTHIA ELETTO (PRESIDENT)
- DIANA ARMSTRONG (RECORDING SECRETARY)
- ANNETTE PARISI (CORRESPONDING SECRETARY)
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
To support programs that benefit women and girls.
What it reported doing in 2024
Project hope and power - wellspring and soroptimist international of saratoga county have collaborated to offer project hope and power, an eight-class education and mentoring session. The eight classes are offered three times per year and are designed to give women the skills they need to increase their options for independence through personal and financial empowerment. While the course content is designed for survivors of domestic violence, any woman who is limited in her choices is eligible to attend project hope and power.
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
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 4
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 75
- Growth: 20
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 2.9%; rating input score 3
- Program expense ratio: 4.5%; rating input score 5
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 35.8%; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.28; rating input score 68; 68th 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: -38.8% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -5.6% per year; rating input score 0; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 4.1% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 2.9% of revenue deployed · 4.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 4 filed program accomplishments · $2K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 8 filing years from 2015 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.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 3/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 5/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.