Georgians for a Healthy Future Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
263695851
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Atlanta, GA, USA
Phone
4045675016
Rating
90
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public Health Program (Includes General Health and Wellness Promotion Services)

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$904,563
Expenses
$1,275,646
Assets
$1,498,829
Liabilities
$576,135

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

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • LAURA COLBERT (Executive Dir.): $112,590 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The mission of Georgians for a Healthy Future is to collaborate with communities and partners to lead policy change that advances health equity for all Georgians. Our vision is of a day in which all Georgians have equitable opportunities to achieve their highest level of health.

What it reported doing in 2024

We organize community forums and workshops across Georgia to foster substantive local dialogue about health issues. We convene local leaders, medical providers, stakeholders, and consumers to discuss the most important health care issues facing them in their communities. We provide leadership, coordination, and strategic direction for a wide range of individual patient and consumer advocate organizations with missions to impact health care policy on behalf of their constituents. We serve as an important resource and source of information for policymakers who make decisions that impact the lives of Georgia health care consumers, and we use our strong and effective voice to advocate for public policy change that brings us closer to our vision of a day in which all Georgians have equitable opportunities to live healthy lives. We are the trusted voice for consumer perspectives on health care cited in the press regularly to represent the consumer perspective on media coverage of health care issues statewide. We have earned a seat at the table with policymakers our staff have been appointed to commissions and task forces to bring the consumer voice to the table as elected and appointed officials make health care policy decisions. We have successfully mobilized coalitions and achieved concrete public policy wins for Georgia consumers.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 78% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 78% for direct work, and 22% for grants.

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: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 23
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 85.7%; rating input score 86
  • Fundraising efficiency: $9.45 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -41%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.17; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.38; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8.8%; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 12.8% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.3% per year; rating input score 100; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 15.9% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 85.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 16 of 16 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $113K · 17 people listed
  • Consistency: 37 of 37 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 7 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 6 filed related-organization links
  • 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 36/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 4/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 48/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 20/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 41/100.