The Servant Forge Inc Dba-institute for Alcohol Awareness

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
201660508
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2020
Forms available
Form 990 2020, Form 990-EZ 2011
Location
Midvale, UT, USA
Phone
7037170850
Rating
54
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Education N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$45,092
Expenses
$35,543
Assets
$85,847
Liabilities
$97,350

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JAMES COPPLE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

People named in this filing

  • JAMES COPPLE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • COLLEEN COPPLE (DIRECTOR)
  • JESSICA DRAKE (DIRECTOR)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Servant forge advances projects that transform individuals and communities toward better health, safety, education and prosperity. Our mission is to build leaders and challenge citizens to embrace service as a means to improve the world around them. The servant forge does business as the international institute for alcohol awareness which prevents and combats the devastating consequences associated with alcohol, drug, abuse and underage drinking.

What it reported doing in 2020

Kenya gender based violence program. Program is providing assistance in health services, housing, education, legal, etc. Needs of kenya women and children effected by violence and drug abuse. Leadership development, training and education programs.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 67% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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

MIXED - Most voting board members are independent and revenue has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 45
  • Transparency & Controls: 55
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 52
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 46.2%; rating input score 46
  • Program expense ratio: 58.6%; rating input score 59
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
  • 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: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 21.2%; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.42; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.13; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -5.9% per year; rating input score 0; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.3% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.8% per year; rating input score 100; 47th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 46.2% of revenue deployed · 58.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $21K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 14 of 14 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2013 to 2020
  • 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.

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

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 46/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 59/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 34/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 4/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.