The Junior League of Tyler Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
750884075
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Tyler, TX, USA
Phone
9035087995
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Women's Service Clubs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$705,246
Expenses
$470,023
Assets
$1,841,431
Liabilities
$191,325

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KIM ORMSBY (President)
  • KAYLEIGH TEMPLE (President ELECT)

People named in this filing

  • JENNIFER KENT (ADVISORY PLANNI)
  • KAITLYN SHULTZ (COMMUNICATIONS)
  • CARY CHOATE (ADMIN 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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The Junior League of Tyler, Inc. is an organization of women committed to promoting volunteerism, developing the potential of women and improving communities through the effective action and leadership of trained volunteers. Its purpose is exclusively educational and charitable.

What it reported doing in 2024

Awarded grants and volunteer hours to 14 (including 2 junior league projects) organizations in the community supporting arts & education, health services, and youth and family issues. By partnering with other community organizations, resources can be pooled to make each dollar have the biggest impact possible on the community. Some of the 2024-2025 highlights include partnering with angel layettes to provide supplies needed to make layettes for smith county families that experience loss, partnering with tyler area business education council to supply items needed to fill backpacks for "school is cool" program, and working with pave east Texas to provide scholarships for adults to complete their core programs such as esl and ged programs. Other community partners include arc of smith county, gold network, neurodivergent advocates, children's advocacy center, christian women's job corps, fostering collective, chapel hill isd foundation, bethesda health clinic, and tyler civic theatre. In league projects included jlt care closet and jlt girl power.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 40% for direct work, and 60% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 56
  • Transparency & Controls: 87
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 78
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 49.2%; rating input score 49
  • Program expense ratio: 64.4%; rating input score 64
  • Fundraising efficiency: $30.45 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 87.6%; rating input score 88; 37th 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: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 33.4%; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.92; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.1; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -2.3% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.2% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.5% per year; rating input score 100; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 49.2% of revenue deployed · 64.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $303K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 31 of 32 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 10 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 7 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 49/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 42/100.