West Alabama Womens Center Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
631097123
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Tuscaloosa, AL, USA
Phone
2055562026
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Family Planning Centers

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$6,499,668
Expenses
$1,600,006
Assets
$5,362,262
Liabilities
$139,282

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Jilisa Milton (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Robin Marty (Director): $124,869 total reported compensation
  • Dr Leah Torres (Board Member 1125 - 1012025): $23,959 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Free and sliding scale reproductive, maternal and sexual health clinic providing stigma-free, patient-centered care regardless of insurance, income, or documentation status. See Schedule O for full mission statement.

What it reported doing in 2025

In 2025 WAWC provided more than 2200 patient appointments and more than 4100 individual services, including prenatal care, birth support, pregnancy verification, miscarriage management, contraception, STI testing, treatment and prevention and other maternal, sexual and reproductive health needs. Average out of pocket costs to patients were $20 per visit, reflecting our commitment to ensuring every person can access the healthcare they need and deserve regardless of income, insurance status or other barriers. WAWC also offered monthly group support programs, childbirth education programs, and did direct medical and educational outreach throughout Tuscaloosa and the surrounding counties in the Alabama Black Belt, helping us offer better access to those in medical deserts who cannot overcome the barriers that prevent them from otherwise seeking care.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 95% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 75% for direct work, and 25% for grants.

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: 51
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 79
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 21.6%; rating input score 22
  • Program expense ratio: 86.6%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: $71.56 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 84; 84th 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: Limited
  • 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: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 75.4%; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.35; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9.3%; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 26.7% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 81.7% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 84.5% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 21.6% of revenue deployed · 86.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $125K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2022 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 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: Mission deployment rate scored 22/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 35/100.