Desert Star Institute for Family Planning Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
821523284
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2022, Form 990-N 2020
Location
Phoenix, AZ, USA
Phone
4804486753
Rating
49
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Family Planning Centers

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$553,824
Expenses
$663,844
Assets
$98,286
Liabilities
$33,266

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DeShawn Taylor (President and CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • DeShawn Taylor (President and CEO): $150,176 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Our mission is to create equitable access to reproductive and sexual health care while centering Black and Indigenous people of color.

What it reported doing in 2024

Next Generation Abortion Providers Program trains medical students, residents, and attending physicians in reproductive health care with an emphasis on abortion training. Clinical instruction includes abortion, contraception, early pregnancy loss, other common women's health conditions, and care of transgender adults. To date, people from 21 states and 3 regions of Canada have traveled to Phoenix to be trained. We apply a reproductive justice lens to our work, so trainees have and experience very different from their traditional clinical rotations. We believe that learning about abortion in an environment where abortion occurs alongside general well-woman care increases student awareness and understanding that abortion is health care. In turn, they are inspired to advocate for women's reproductive healthcare access and delivery, and are empowered to become advocates within their own communities. 2 - 4 week rotations can be scheduled at the Desert Star Health Justice Clinic. We are a preferred site for the Medical Students for Choice Reproductive Health Externship Program and now have partnerships with several additional organizations as referral sources for training. 5 people were trained over 16 total training weeks in 2024. Impacted by the political landscape and looming 1864 total abortion ban that was ultimately repealed, we paused our training program as we awaited how the litigation and additional efforts by the attorney general would impact our ability to provide abortion services, and thereby train. Two trainee institutions canceled rotations for their learners during that time.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 67% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

MIXED - 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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 28
  • Transparency & Controls: 62
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 10
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 25.8%; rating input score 26
  • Program expense ratio: 21.5%; rating input score 22
  • Fundraising efficiency: $21.58 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 2nd 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: 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: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -19.9%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.15; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.34; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 22.6%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -56.4% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 51.6% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 29.7% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 25.8% of revenue deployed · 21.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $515K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $150K · 9 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 31 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2023 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 26/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 22/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 9/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 7/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 12/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 22/100.