The Junior League of Richmond Virginia Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
540519575
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2023
Forms available
Form 990 2023
Location
Richmond, VA, USA
Phone
8046434886
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Women's Service Clubs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$959,485
Expenses
$923,172
Assets
$5,039,802
Liabilities
$831,531

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • EMILY JANTO (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • EMILY JANTO (PRESIDENT)
  • QUINN NOVAK (PAST PRESIDE)
  • MARIANNE ZINZAN (EXECUTIVE VP)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The junior league of richmond is an organization of women committed to the mission of advancing women's leadership for meaningful community impact through volunteer action, collaboration, and training.

What it reported doing in 2023

Leadership development: internal and external leadership training for members. Career jumpstart: this committee partners with the forward foundation to plan and execute programming geared towards professional and personal development (the forward foundation is a nonprofit dedicated to assisting working, single parents and their children in the greater richmond area who are in the midst of a financial crisis). On a quarterly basis, they provide programs to the forward foundation families that are designed to help enhance different life skills including salary negotiation, career advancement, personal branding, and financial literacy. Population(s) served: single parents and their families cooking with jlr: this program partners with the ywca to provide women served by the ywca food boxes with nutritious ingredients, recipes, and essential kitchen tools and supplies. Population(s) served: survivors of domestic violence and human and sex trafficking done in a day: this program connects with community partners to plan single day and ongoing short projects, in order to offer service and engagement with the greater richmond area. Committees may also have one-to-two subcommittees that work directly with specific community partners on long-term and/or monthly programs, such as kids in the kitchen. Population(s) served: all women women rise: this committee works in conjunction with real life to connect with women in the greater richmond community who need female comradery, education around infant and child care, and a support network as they navigate the transition from incarceration, addiction issues, housing insecurity, and/or poverty. This program will help to empower underserved women and provide resources, education, and conversation around topics that are most applicable. Population(s) served: at-risk women

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 62% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 70% for direct work, 27% for grants, and 4% for affiliated organizations.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 68
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 62
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 74%; rating input score 74
  • Program expense ratio: 77%; rating input score 77
  • Fundraising efficiency: $2.94 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 3.8%; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.46; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.16; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -3.7% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.6% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.7% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 74% of revenue deployed · 77% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $711K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2011 to 2023
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 4 filed related-organization links
  • 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: Fundraising efficiency scored 9/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 49/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 36/100.