Southwest Forensic Nursing & Healthcare

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
920366094
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2022
Location
Saint George, UT, USA
Phone
8884367421
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Rape Victim Services

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$521,711
Expenses
$479,881
Assets
$43,324
Liabilities
$3,276

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DANIELLE ROSS (PRESIDENT UNTIL 052024)
  • LISA BROWN (PRESIDENT AS OF 052024)
  • BRENNAN DOUGHERTY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR AS OF 072025)

Highest reported compensation

  • CAMDEN CAIFA (EXEC DIR UNTIL 062025): $109,560 total reported compensation
  • ROBERT FOSTER (MD UNTIL 072025): $7,950 total reported compensation
  • DANIELLE ROSS (PRESIDENT UNTIL 052024): $2,106 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To ensure patient-centered, trauma-informed healthcare and support services to all survivors of violence, with a focused commitment to delivering rape and sexual assault victim services to underserved populations.

What it reported doing in 2024

Voca: expand access to services to additional locations within Washington county and expand into iron county, 100% of all exams are peer reviewed, mdt participation operations director is chair of sart, technical assistance, prevention and awareness events.expansion to 3 additional clinical sites including opening of our private clinic space, 100% peer review of cases records, 105 technical assistance calls, participation in 18 prevention and awareness events.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 83% 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 - Most voting board members are independent and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 57
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 35
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 62.2%; rating input score 62
  • Program expense ratio: 67.6%; rating input score 68
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 8th 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: 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: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 8%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.09; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.08; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 24.9%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 54.6% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 93.6% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 23.1% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 62.2% of revenue deployed · 67.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments · $325K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $110K · 12 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 25 of 26 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2023 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 4/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 57/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 10/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 46/100.