Survivors of Torture International

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
330743869
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
San Diego, CA, USA
Phone
6192782400
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,152,097
Expenses
$3,272,469
Assets
$1,894,448
Liabilities
$636,199

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ETLEVA BEJKO (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • ETLEVA BEJKO (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $179,393 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Facilitating the healing of survivors of torture or trauma resulting from international human rights violations, educating professionals and the public about torture and its consequences, and advocating for survivors of torture and the abolition of torture.

What it reported doing in 2024

Survivors of torture international provides comprehensive, trauma-informed behavioral health and support services to survivors of torture, refugees, asylum seekers, and their families throughout san diego county. Services include individual and group psychotherapy, psychiatric care, medical case management, care coordination, forensic psychological evaluations, psychoeducation, and community-based support designed to promote healing, recovery, and long-term stability.during the fiscal year, the organization continued expanding access to culturally and linguistically responsive mental health services while strengthening partnerships with healthcare providers, universities, public agencies, and community organizations. In addition to direct services, survivors educated healthcare professionals and community members about the effects of torture and trauma and advocated locally and nationally for policies that protect survivors and uphold human rights.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 86% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 26
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 85.9%; rating input score 86
  • Program expense ratio: 82.6%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: $16.62 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • 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: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -3.8%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.58; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.34; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.5%; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 13.4% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 12.9% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13.2% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 85.9% of revenue deployed · 82.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $179K · 14 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $410K reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • 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.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 54/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 22/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 21/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 31/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 50/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.