Oregon Spinal Cord Injury Connection

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
811037564
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2019
Location
Portland, OR, USA
Phone
5036216321
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Health Support Services

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$427,229
Expenses
$633,802
Assets
$806,834
Liabilities
$14,508

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • WEST LIVAUDAIS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • MATT HOWARD (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • WEST LIVAUDAIS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $73,334 total reported compensation
  • CASEY MOORE (SECRETARY): $36,920 total reported compensation
  • MATT HOWARD (VICE PRESIDENT): $12,482 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The mission of Oregon Spinal Cord Injury Connection is to ensure everyone living with a spinal cord injury in Oregon has the care, community, and resources they need to thrive.

What it reported doing in 2024

COMMUNITY HEALTH WORKER PROGRAM: After a traumatic SCI, social support is critically important. Trauma can leave lasting marks on a person's mind, heart and body that can result in an inability to trust easily. A CHW is a peer who has similar lived-experienced of spinal cord injury trauma and can offer emotional support in the form of empathy, empowerment, trust, and care. A community health worker also helps a person learn to direct their own care, adopt positive coping mechanisms and health-promoting behaviors, skills, and habits that will help them thrive. A CHW provides a warm introduction to the Oregon SCI community where new friendships support recreation, education, employment, stable housing, and peer connections. Additionally, as a liaison and link to the healthcare system and other community organizations CHWs can offer tangible aid to resources and services. Newly injured people who are supported by CHWs and the OSCI community are more likely to avoid serious secondary health conditions that can lead to rehospitalization. This level of personal advocacy accelerates their transition through the tumultuous first year toward being independent and developing a positive health trajectory that allows them to maintain a high quality of life.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 94% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 52
  • Sustainability: 23
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 72.1%; rating input score 72
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5.7 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 50%; rating input score 50; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 56
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -48.4%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.27; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 19.4%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.2% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 13% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 47.5% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 72.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 6 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $457K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $73K · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 42 of 43 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 50/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 25/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 5/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 47/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule G fundraiser detail did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 20/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 41/100.