Utah Abortion Fund

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
331496995
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Salt Lake City, UT, USA
Phone
8012159441
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Family Planning Centers

Reported finances

Revenue
$473,727
Expenses
$602,914
Assets
$1,003,274
Liabilities
$1,615

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MACKENZIE BRAY (President)
  • ALI VALLARTA (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • MACKENZIE BRAY (President)
  • ALI VALLARTA (Vice President)
  • SHANNON KELLIHER (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. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Utah Abortion Fund provides financial and practical support for people traveling to, from, and within Utah seeking safe reproductive care. Utah Abortion Fund believes everyone deserves access to reproductive health care, free of judgement, stigma, and economic barriers.

What it reported doing in 2025

Operated and funded educational programs throughout the State of Utah regarding reproductive health and access issues, including providing support and education on scheduling health care appointments and access to reproductive health care products.Provided financial and practical support to people seeking an abortion who need financial assistance. This activity is conducted by the Fund and its volunteers for individuals traveling to, from, and within Utah seeking digital communication.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 99% 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

SUPPORTED - 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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 58
  • Sustainability: 33
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 82.5%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: $18.64 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 53; 53rd 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: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 0 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -27.3%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.66; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 169.6% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -86.1% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -12% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 82.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 0 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $497K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2024 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 8/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 53/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 54/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 49/100.