Trust Women Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
273246473
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2010
Location
Wichita, KS, USA
Phone
3164253215
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Reproductive Health Care Facilities and Allied Services

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,655,233
Expenses
$6,882,404
Assets
$4,872,275
Liabilities
$118,277

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Sapphire Lies (President)
  • Shukeyla Harrison (Interim CEO (Apr - Jun))
  • Schaunta James-Boyd (Co-Executive Director (Jan - Apr))
  • Rebecca Tong (Co-Executive Director (Jan - Apr))

Highest reported compensation

  • Schaunta James-Boyd (Co-Executive Director (Jan - Apr)): $130,585 total reported compensation
  • Rebecca Tong (Co-Executive Director (Jan - Apr)): $121,558 total reported compensation
  • Shukeyla Harrison (Interim CEO (Apr - Jun)): $85,912 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The mission of Trust Women Foundation (the Foundation) is to open clinics that provide abortion care in underserved communities so that all women can make their own decisions about their health care. The Foundation promotes expanded access to abortions through public education, grassroots organizing and community building in Kansas and Oklahoma.

What it reported doing in 2024

The Foundation provided medical services to 3,226 patients in the Wichita, Kansas clinic and also to 350 patients in the Oklahoma City, Oklahoma clinic.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 73% 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.
  • 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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 23
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 76.5%; rating input score 76
  • Fundraising efficiency: $11.52 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 17th 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: No; rating input score 0

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 56
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -47.8%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.71; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.4%; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 14.2% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 13.7% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13.2% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 76.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $5.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $131K · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 30 of 31 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 4 filed related-organization links
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 9 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 42/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 26/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 45/100.