Turkish Womens League of America Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
132924503
IRS 990 coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
5162345015
Rating
63
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Women's Service Clubs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$202,159
Expenses
$120,117
Assets
$249,430
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BERNA GURAL (President)
  • ESRA DOGRU (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • BERNA GURAL (President)
  • ESRA DOGRU (Vice President)
  • MINE YENIGUN (Secretary General)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Promote Turkish language, culture, and heritage through educational programs community events, and grants supporting Turkish-American cultural organizations

What it reported doing in 2025

Operated the Ataturk Turkish School at Eleanor Roosevelt High School in Manhattan, New York. Provided weekend Turkish language and cultural education classes for children. The school conducted Saturday sessions throughout the year with approximately 100 to 110 participants. Instruction covered Turkish language at multiple proficiency levels, cultural history, and community heritage. All instructors were engaged as independent contractors Students paid tuition for participation in the Program

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 99% 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 total spending goes to programs and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 67
  • Transparency & Controls: 47
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 76
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 54.4%; rating input score 54
  • Program expense ratio: 93%; rating input score 93
  • Fundraising efficiency: $22.65 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Limited
    • Requires narrative reports: Limited
    • Conducts field audits: Limited
    • May suspend future funding: Limited
    • Requires financial reports: Limited
    • Conducts site visits: Limited
    • Requires grant agreements: Limited
    • May require repayment: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 0%; rating input score 0; 20th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • 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: 40.6%; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.08; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 2.8% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.9% per year; rating input score 100; 30th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 54.4% of revenue deployed · 93% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $110K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 24 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 54/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 58/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.