Institute for Natural Medicine

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
020464611
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2015, Form 990-N 2014
Location
Seattle, WA, USA
Phone
2064863380
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,038,452
Expenses
$954,818
Assets
$836,395
Liabilities
$120,944

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DR MICHELLE SIMON (PRESIDENT & CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • DR MICHELLE SIMON (PRESIDENT & CEO): $88,234 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

At our mission's core is a commitment to reversing chronic disease in the united states through preventive care and evidence-informed natural medicine. We aim to connect people with the information, guidance, and expertise they need for a healthier future.

What it reported doing in 2024

Education & outreach: this program includes efforts to educate and engage the public en masse about natural medicine and whole person health in general and naturopathic medicine in particular. The program includes: the campaign for naturopathic medicine, a collaboration with the american association of naturopathic physicians (aanp); our md-do advisory board, which entails the mobilization of allied professionals to respond to public relations challenges and bolster the reputation of naturopathic medicine; and the inm consumer website, the direct infrastructure needed to host an online presence for education and engagement content; and a "find a natural doctor" web hosted service to easily connect prospective patients with licensed doctors.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 97% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 68% for direct work, and 32% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - 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 the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 58
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 47
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 58.1%; rating input score 58
  • Program expense ratio: 63.1%; rating input score 63
  • Fundraising efficiency: $10.21 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 84.6%; rating input score 85; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: 97.1%; rating input score 97; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 81.8%; rating input score 82; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 8.1%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.88; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.14; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9.2%; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 10.5% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 12.1% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 17.5% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 58.1% of revenue deployed · 63.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 11 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments · $603K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $88K · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 29 of 31 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and grants
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2016 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 13 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 13 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 58/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 39/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 57/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 39/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 37/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 39/100.