V-Day

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
943389430
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
San Francisco, CA, USA
Phone
2126458329
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Sexual Abuse, Prevention

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$841,098
Expenses
$4,218,391
Assets
$7,685,638
Liabilities
$310,054

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Susan Celia Swan (Executive Director)
  • Eve Ensler (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Susan Celia Swan (Executive Director): $266,510 total reported compensation
  • Aja Bacquie (Artistic Director, VOICES): $125,376 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To end violence against all women, gender-expansive people, girls, and the Earth.

What it reported doing in 2024

City of Joy and V-World Farm/Democratic Republic of Congo: City of Joy program supports a transformational leadership center for women survivors of gender violence in Bukavu, DRC that provides women participants with training and trauma therapy to build their lives towards those of service and activism. V-World Farm is a sustainable farm located south of Bukavu where women from the City of Joy train in sustainable farming practices and many work following their graduation from the City of Joy.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 70% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 85% 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 the filed numbers largely add up. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 62
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 29
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 90.5%; rating input score 91
  • Fundraising efficiency: $7.99 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 94.9%; rating input score 95; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: -401.5%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.82; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9.3%; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1.6% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -4.2% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.4% per year; rating input score 100; 31st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 90.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 11 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $3.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $267K · 12 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $254K reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 32 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 10 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 8 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 — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 31/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 0/100.
  • 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: Officer compensation ratio scored 39/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 55/100.