The Save a Leg Save a Life Foundation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 320467696
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2018–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2025
- Location
- Bradenton, FL, USA
- Phone
- 8887725725
- Rating
- 61
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Public Foundations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $56,485
- Expenses
- $22,022
- Assets
- $36,178
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
13 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Alton Johnson (President)
People named in this filing
- Alton Johnson (President)
- Elizabeth Faust (Presidentelect)
- Scott Nelson (Secretary)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To reduce often unnecessary lower extremity amputations and improve the quality of life for those afflicted with wounds and complications from diabetes and peripheral arterial disease.
What it reported doing in 2025
Community Screening Events. We conducted 3 community health screening events this year (Mobile, AL; Milwaukee WI, and Zieglersville, PA) for those who are at high risk of developing diabetes and PAD related wounds. Screenings included vascular assessment, vision, HbA1c, balance and fall prevention, diabetic foot assessment and Blood pressure, in addition to counseling and referrals to needed services.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 92% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 82% 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. 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: 32
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 68
- Growth: 40
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 19.9%; rating input score 20
- Program expense ratio: 51%; rating input score 51
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 61%; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.64; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -6.4% per year; rating input score 0; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 4.2% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -10.4% per year; rating input score 0; 17th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 19.9% of revenue deployed · 51% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $11K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 13 people listed
- Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 4 filing years from 2018 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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 20/100.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 51/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.