Safer New Mexico Now Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 850334014
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2011–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Albuquerque, NM, USA
- Phone
- 5058566100
- Rating
- 74
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $2,205,281
- Expenses
- $2,093,645
- Assets
- $1,211,559
- Liabilities
- $383,450
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
10 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- LISA KELLOFF (CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- LISA KELLOFF (CEO): $196,068 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Safer strives to reduce the physical, emotional, and social burden of injuries. In pursuit of safer communities, safer will advocate for informed policy-making, provide education, support law enforcement, offer resources, and nurture public understanding.
What it reported doing in 2025
Occupant seatbelt observation study: safer contracted with pressure research group, inc. (prg) to assist with the New Mexico occupant seatbelt observationstudy. As a contractor, safer provides expertise and statewide resources to effectively determine and evaluate survey sites and assist with the analysis process.safer also provides training, evaluation, and support to three New Mexico field surveyors by conducting pre/post-survey training meetings. In doing so, saferproduces site data forms, facilitates scheduling, and offers recommendations to prg. Additionally, safer collaborates with prg regarding the annual report designand content and makes it available for statewide distribution.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 97% 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 65
- Transparency & Controls: 81
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 33
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 72.4%; rating input score 72
- Program expense ratio: 76.3%; rating input score 76
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 14th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- 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: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
- 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: Fail
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 5.1%; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.58; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.32; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 9.4%; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -0.7% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 2.1% per year; rating input score 100; 17th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 9.9% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 72.4% of revenue deployed · 76.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 6 filed program accomplishments · $1.6M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $196K · 10 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 28 of 29 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- 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.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 43/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 19/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Audit committee oversight not reported.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 25/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 35/100.