Southern Arizona Gender Alliance Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
472419543
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2023
Forms available
Form 990 2023, Form 990-EZ 2021, Form 990-N 2015
Location
Tucson, AZ, USA
Rating
44
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Reported finances

Revenue
$243,148
Expenses
$479,850
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LOUIS MITHCELL (PRESIDENT)
  • GRAYCE LOWE (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • TYRELL BLAQUEMOSS (CO-MANAGER): $70,810 total reported compensation
  • AJ TIEDEMAN (MANAGER): $50,431 total reported compensation
  • GRAYCE LOWE (VICE PRESIDENT): $10,950 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Provides support, education, resources, and advocacy for approximately 2,000 trans and gender nonconforming (TGNC) individuals in Southern Arizona. SAGA does so through providing trans comprehension trainings to businesses, nonprofits, and government agencies; mailing monthly Trans Care Packages to mitigate the effects of gender dysphoria and in turn encourage gender euphoria; facilitating seven monthly support groups for TGNC individuals, family, and friends; hosting community building events; providing medical and therapist recommendations for TGNC folks; and providing legal assistance to TGNC individuals primarily pertaining to name gender marker change.

What it reported doing in 2023

Fiscal sponsorships for 2 companies

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 53
  • Sustainability: 3
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 75%; rating input score 75; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 22
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -97.3%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 30%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 31.8% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 15% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 4 board members independent · 2 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $157K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $71K · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 11 of 12 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2022 to 2023
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 7 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 11/100.