Nevada Obstetrical Charity Clinics Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
264834603
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2015, Form 990-N 2013
Location
Las Vegas, NV, USA
Phone
7024352229
Rating
60
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Reproductive Health Care Facilities and Allied Services

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$619,280
Expenses
$529,899
Assets
$204,804
Liabilities
$12,100

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KORD T STREBEL MD (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • JONATHAN HERNANDEZ (SECRETARY): $58,646 total reported compensation
  • ALEJANDRA GONZALES-FUNES (CFO): $37,301 total reported compensation
  • THERESA CHEVALIER NP (COO & VICE P): $31,625 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The Nevada obstetrical charity clinic (nocc) is a non-profit organization that is dedicated to helping women obtain affordable healthcare, educating the community on the importance of prenatal care and early cancer screening, and also working on research to bring the most up to date medical technology and procedures to the las vegas community.

What it reported doing in 2025

Nocc provides low or no-cost prenatal care and gynocological services to women with financial need. These services are provided to those who may otherwise not receive any medical care for pregnancy or general reproductive health.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 52
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 25
  • Sustainability: 42
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 54.8%; rating input score 55
  • Program expense ratio: 64%; rating input score 64
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 25%; rating input score 25; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 14.4%; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.39; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 24.1%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.4% per year; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.2% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.2% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 54.8% of revenue deployed · 64% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 1 of 4 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $339K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $59K · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2016 to 2025
  • 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 55/100.
  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 25/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 19/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 12/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 41/100.