The Vitamin D Foundation Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 262728263
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2010–2014
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2014
- Location
- Jackson, MI, USA
- Phone
- 5177879481
- Rating
- 82
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Public Health Program (Includes General Health and Wellness Promotion Services)
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $6,708
- Expenses
- $27,991
- Assets
- $1,808
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
6 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- ROGER HOLMES JR (PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- DOUGLAS MCNABB (DIRECTOR)
- JAMES OLIVER (SECRETARY)
- VICKI DEVAULT (BOOKKEEPER)
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 2014. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The corporation was formed for the charitable and educational purposes including but not limited to the education of americans about the importance of vitamin d and to increase the awareness of health conditions associated with the deficiency of vitamin d. In addition, the foundation will try to teach individuals the importance of annual testing and becoming proactive in their health and well being as becoming more active and informed in the funding of vitamin d research to prevent or reduce the various forms of diseases as a result of vitamin d defeciency.
What it reported doing in 2014
The vitamin d foundation continued its efforts in education and research on vitamin d deficiency.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 80% of its reported program spending out as grants.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and program spending has declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 98
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 10
- Growth: 0
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 94%; rating input score 94
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -317.3%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.06; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -7.1% per year; rating input score 0; 37th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -8.7% per year; rating input score 0; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -43.5% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 94% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $26K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
- Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 5 filing years from 2010 to 2014
- 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 3/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 7/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.