Women's Wellbeing & Development Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
352307069
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Asheville, NC, USA
Phone
8289896227
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Education N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue
$159,252
Expenses
$91,991
Assets
$1,109,259
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ANA JABRA (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • MUI CHAO (MEDIA COORDI)
  • RU LIAN CHENG (TREASURER)
  • AINE NI FHIACHAIN (VICE PRESIDE)

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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Wwd-f empowers women and children to achieve personal growth and the comprehensive development of their communities. It focuses on disadvantaged populations providing education, health and economic opportunity.

What it reported doing in 2024

Women's empowerment program - this program conducts workshops and retreats for women, many from low income communities, that teach life skills, employment skills, personal growth exercises, health and nutrition information, and other capacity building and empowement training. Wwd-f community service and relief activities in madison county womens wellbeing and development foundation (wwd-f) deeply supports the madison county community. While its primary mission centers on educational initiatives, wwd-f also steps up in times of crisis, playing a critical role in disaster response and community relief efforts. Hurricane helene relief efforts following the devastation caused by hurricane helene, wwd-f temporarily shifted its focus to provide urgent aid to affected families. In collaboration with amurtel, a national womens relief organization, wwd-f distributed emergency financial assistance to more than 50 families in the marshall area who experienced significant losses. In addition to financial aid, wwd-f coordinated the distribution of essential supplies to hundreds of local residents, including cleaning products, clothing, household goods, and hygiene items. The organization also arranged for the delivery of 50 handmade quilts to offer comfort and warmth during the recovery period. One of the most impactful contributions wwdf made was the coordination and delivery of a full truckload of building supplies. These materials were provided to the local marshall recovery hub to assist in rebuilding damaged homes and restoring the community.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 99% 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

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of total spending goes to programs. 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: 63
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 86
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 55.5%; rating input score 56
  • Program expense ratio: 96.1%; rating input score 96
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 42.2%; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 12.06; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.8% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -5.5% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.1% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 55.5% of revenue deployed · 96.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $88K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2019 to 2024
  • 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 56/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.