Down Syndrome Association of Tulsa
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 731249272
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2014–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2024
- Location
- Tulsa, OK, USA
- Phone
- 9188844680
- Rating
- 49
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Health
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $82,504
- Expenses
- $62,268
- Assets
- $251,528
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
14 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- BRIAN WANDEL (Vice President)
- CHRIS SWIFT (President)
People named in this filing
- BONNIE DUFFIELD (Board Member)
- JENNIFER AMSTUTZ (Treasurer)
- BRIAN WANDEL (Vice President)
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
The down syndrome association of tulsa (dsat) is a non-profit organization that exists to enhance the lives of individuals with down syndrome, their families and communities. This is accomplished by fostering positive attitudes and opportunities for people with down syndrome via empowerment, inclusion, educational events, and purposeful connections while celebrating their extraordinary lives and accomplishments.
What it reported doing in 2024
Events provided to individuals with down syndrome and their families.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
- 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 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: 6
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 66
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 5.1%; rating input score 5
- Program expense ratio: 6.8%; rating input score 7
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: 24.5%; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.04; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -26.3% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 8.6% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 11.2% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 5.1% of revenue deployed · 6.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $4K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 14 people listed
- Consistency: 6 of 7 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules
- Filing history: 9 filing years from 2014 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 7/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.