International Association for Suicide Prevention

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
204701041
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2029873548
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Personal Social Services

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$662,690
Expenses
$698,605
Assets
$566,233
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Professor Jo Robinson (President)
  • Dr Mark Sinyor (Vice President)
  • Professor Sandersan Onie (Vice President)
  • Professor Ann John (Vice President)
  • Mrs Wendy Orchard (Chief Executive Officer)

People named in this filing

  • Professor Jo Robinson (President)
  • Dr Mark Sinyor (Vice President)
  • Professor Sandersan Onie (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. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

IASP is dedicated to preventing suicide and suicidal behaviour alleviating its effects and providing a forum for academics mental health professionals crisis workers volunteers and suicide survivors.

What it reported doing in 2024

The World Health Organization WHO encourages all its members to take effective action to prevent suicidal behaviour but recognises that there is no one way forward: [t]he steps a country should take next will depend on where the country is on the way towards suicide prevention WHO 2014: 66. Countries that have relatively comprehensive national response are advised to focus on evaluation and improvement updating knowledge with new data and emphasising effectiveness and efficiency. Countries with existing suicide prevention activities should identify what is already in place and where there are gaps that need to be filled. Countries yet to undertake suicide prevention activities should concentrate on identifying and engaging stakeholders developing activities where there is greatest need or where resources already exist and improving surveillance. IASP recognise the need to provide expert support to countries especially low and middle income countries [LaMICs] where suicide prevention action has not yet been initiated or where activities are being under- taken in a non-strategic and uncoordinated manner. World Health Organization WHO 2014 Preventing suicide. A global imperative. WHO: Geneva.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 73
  • Transparency & Controls: 51
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 42
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 70.6%; rating input score 71
  • Program expense ratio: 66.9%; rating input score 67
  • Fundraising efficiency: $813.2 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
  • 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 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -5.4%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.81; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 15.3% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 13.1% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.2% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 70.6% of revenue deployed · 66.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 7 filed program accomplishments · $468K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 37 of 41 current checks pass · 4 findings to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2016 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 23/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 36/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX AllOtherExpenses column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX InformationTechnology column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX OfficeExpenses column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.