The Suda Institute

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
883770780
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2023, Form 990-N 2022
Location
Mooresville, NC, USA
Phone
7049535619
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public Health Program (Includes General Health and Wellness Promotion Services)

Reported finances

Revenue
$435,909
Expenses
$551,565
Assets
$361,009
Liabilities
$3,352

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Gina Hofert (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • Gina Hofert (CEO): $121,500 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The Suda Institute brings healthcare, behavioral health, and social services together to improve outcomes for infants and mothers impacted by substance use disorders.

What it reported doing in 2025

Contract with Cabarrus Health Alliance from (OSF) Opioid Settlement Funds (Yr2)The Cabarrus Health Alliance SUN Clinic utilizes OSF to contract with The Suda Institute to implement the system level activities and research and evaluation activities of the SUN Project in Cabarrus County. Our scope of work consists of: 1) Working collaboratively with CHA and community partners to recruit, maintain, and re-engage key partners, stakeholders, and agencies for cross-sector coordination of care for clients, to address systems barriers, and expand services to include others impacted by OUD; and 2)Evaluating project activities to measure outcomes and quality as a method to address stigma, direct policy-system-level recommendations, and support and educate families affected by NAS and SUD. In Cabarrus County, 10 monthly care coordination meetings were held with partners for Cabarrus County (more with other counties), 10 community feedback group meetings hosted with 104 participant encounters, and 45 referrals generated.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 88% 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.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - 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: 74
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 20
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 85%; rating input score 85
  • Program expense ratio: 66.9%; rating input score 67
  • Fundraising efficiency: $10.28 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • 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; 64th 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -26.5%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.65; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 22%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -11.9% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -14.3% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 49.4% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 85% of revenue deployed · 66.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 6 filed program accomplishments · $369K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $122K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2023 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 38/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 9/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 30/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 17/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 40/100.