Women's Leadership Institute of Utah

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
472963429
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Salt Lake City, UT, USA
Phone
8013285084
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Personal Social Services

Reported finances

Revenue
$512,503
Expenses
$718,922
Assets
$855,520
Liabilities
$114,067

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Melanie Jones (Chief Executive Officer & Board Member)
  • Patricia Jones (Former Chief Executive Officer & Board Member)

Highest reported compensation

  • Patricia Jones (Former Chief Executive Officer & Board Member): $181,215 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

We elevate women into leadership so they can elevate Utah's families, businesses, and communities in return.

What it reported doing in 2024

Elevateher challenge: a tiered corporate challenge inviting Utah employers to ensure qualified women are seen, developed, and considered for leadership - and that organizational systems support their success. Companies choose the level of commitment that fits where they are. Pledge: a public statement affirming the organization's commitment to building leadership pipelines that develop and consider women, and to cultivating a culture where everyone has a stake in one another's success. Commit: active practice in one or more areas, including expanding candidate slates for senior roles, investing in mentorship and sponsorship, upholding pay equity and fair hiring practices, and implementing family-friendly policies that retain talent. Certify: demonstrated practice change in a commit area, supported by documented policy or process improvements and evidence of sustained follow-through.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 64% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 97% 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 87
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 22
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 78%; rating input score 78
  • Fundraising efficiency: $14.06 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 87%; rating input score 87; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 81.8%; rating input score 82; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -40.3%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.19; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.13; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 25.2%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.8% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3% per year; rating input score 100; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.6% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 78% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 11 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $561K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $181K · 13 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 32 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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: Fundraising efficiency scored 48/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 4/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 48/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 10/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 38/100.