Iowa Healthiest State Initiative

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
454570642
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2013, Form 990-N 2012
Location
Des Moines, IA, USA
Phone
5156506854
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public Health Program (Includes General Health and Wellness Promotion Services)

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,068,526
Expenses
$3,011,109
Assets
$704,924
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JAMI HABERL (SECRETARY/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • APRIL SCHMALTZ (PRESIDENT)
  • AARON WEISE (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • JAMI HABERL (SECRETARY/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $222,205 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Creating awareness and integrating solutions to improve the physical, social, and mental well-being of iowans.

What it reported doing in 2024

5-2-1-0 healthy choices count: parents. Teachers. Health care providers. Business leaders. When it comes to kids, there's one thing everyone wants for them to be healthy! That's why Iowa has created healthy choices count! It's a health-focused movement for kids that's under the nationally recognized program, 5-2-1-0. This proven, scientific method helps keep kids healthy by focusing on the importance of good habits. And it all starts by encouraging them to eat and play the right way. It's how they can live 5-2-1-0. We partner with early care providers, schools, health care institutions, parents, and community organizations for families in places where we live, learn, work, and play. 5-2-1-0 healthy choices count served 42,000 individuals.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 82% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 79% for direct work, and 21% for grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 91
  • Transparency & Controls: 74
  • Accountability: 93
  • Sustainability: 37
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 91.4%; rating input score 91
  • Program expense ratio: 93.2%; rating input score 93
  • Fundraising efficiency: $91.01 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 91.8%; rating input score 92; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 19th 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: 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: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 1.9%; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.23; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.4%; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 18.2% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 17.1% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 91.4% of revenue deployed · 93.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 8 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments · $2.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $222K · 8 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 33 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 41/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 7/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 40/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.