Women S Debate Institute
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 522322054
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2019–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2020
- Location
- Denver, CO, USA
- Phone
- 8582544673
- Rating
- 52
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Job Training
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $80,115
- Expenses
- $13,965
- Assets
- $71,825
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
10 people listed
People named in this filing
- AVA VARGASON (BOARD CHAIR)
- SARAH GLASER (DIRECTOR OF FINANCES)
- CHRISTI SIVER (DIRECTOR OF CURRICULUM)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To provide a debate camp each summer for high school and college students who are from marginalized gender identities.
What it reported doing in 2024
General program: in 2024, the organization did not host a debate camp. Program expenses were directed toward supporting annual board and staff development, as well as organizational planning and preparation to ensure a successful debate camp in 2025
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 14
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 85
- Growth: 20
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 4.8%; rating input score 5
- Program expense ratio: 27.8%; rating input score 28
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 82.6%; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.14; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -10.9% per year; rating input score 0; 26th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -7.3% per year; rating input score 0; 29th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 5.2% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 4.8% of revenue deployed · 27.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $4K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
- Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 6 filing years from 2019 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
- 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 5/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 28/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.