Fort Worth Association of Health Underwriters

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
752400318
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2019
Location
Wichita Falls, TX, USA
Phone
8176498086
Rating
96
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$47,612
Expenses
$41,449
Assets
$27,436
Liabilities
$5,318

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • AUDRA SULLIVAN (PRESIDENT)
  • STACY COCHRAN (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • AUDRA SULLIVAN (PRESIDENT)
  • STACY COCHRAN (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • AUBREY VIDETICH (SECRETARY)

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 fort worth association of health underwriters exists to inform and protect the consumer through the professional growth of its members.

What it reported doing in 2024

The fort worth association of health underwriters exists to inform and protect the consumer through the professional growth of its members. For the 2024 fiscal year, eight new members joined bringing the total members to 111. The amount of people informed through our email was 886.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 62% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filed totals do not add up and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 100
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 50
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100

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: 12.9%; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.66; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.19; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.4% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.4% per year; rating input score 0; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.7% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $52K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2010 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.

  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III program expenses within total did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 36/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 14/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.