Ken Garff for Good

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
453567196
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Salt Lake City, UT, USA
Phone
8012573577
Rating
64
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Youth Development Programs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$6,100,294
Expenses
$4,012,495
Assets
$7,367,502
Liabilities
$438,991

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Erin Tranbeath-Murray (President)
  • Mallory Santa Cruz (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Rick Clayton (Director of Business Development): $242,181 total reported compensation
  • Mallory Santa Cruz (Vice President): $111,548 total reported compensation
  • Kaitlin Dietrich (Secretary): $81,328 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Promote excellence in education and help Utah students prepare for post-secondary education.

What it reported doing in 2024

Women who succeed: the purpose of women who succeed is to provide opportunities for girls and young women to grow in confidence and leadership skills. We do this by providing mentoring, scholarships, internships, and networking opportunities. With successful events such as the women who succeed conference, summer soiree, girls give back, diamonds on ice, founders day, and socials throughout the year, we saw an average of 88% regular mentee engagement throughout the year. We were able to maximize networking opportunities while awarding over $100,000 in scholarships and other grants and connecting mentees with internship opportunities. Women who succeed has continued to make intentional efforts this year to provide opportunities for young women to grow confidence and leadership skills through these mentorship meetings, provided curriculum, events, and other opportunities like scholarships, workshops, service projects and internships. Throughout the year we had 156 women members and 280 mentees as a part of the program with 35% of the mentees from rural communities and 35% were women of color.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 97% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 86% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.
  • 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 few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 56
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 68
  • Sustainability: 69
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 50.6%; rating input score 51
  • Program expense ratio: 74.5%; rating input score 75
  • Fundraising efficiency: $7.51 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 64.7%; rating input score 65; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 84.6%; rating input score 85; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 44
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 34.2%; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.84; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.8%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 10.3% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 12.4% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 19.4% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 50.6% of revenue deployed · 74.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 13 board members independent · 4 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $242K · 16 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $378K reported
  • Consistency: 37 of 38 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • 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 51/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 28/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 59/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 27/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.