Utah Infertility Resource Center

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
475024800
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2019, Form 990-N 2015
Location
Salt Lake City, UT, USA
Phone
3853130990
Rating
86
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Counseling, Support Groups

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$137,744
Expenses
$306,604
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • SHELLI MECHAM (EXECUTIVE DI): $30,740 total reported compensation
  • MELISSA KNOLES (EXECUTIVE DI): $19,271 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To help individuals and couples of all shapes, sizes, colors and orientations to grow their families. We offer education, support, and awareness for Utah's infertility community. Our goal is to help you be empowered, strengthened and equipped for your journey.

What it reported doing in 2024

Peer-led support groups: these are free, monthly, volunteer-led gatherings of people who are experiencing infertility. We held one group in weber county, 3 groups in salt lake county, 1 in Utah county. Additionally, one group was dedicated specifically for men experiencing infertility and we also held a virtual group so people around the state could join. We served 18 unduplicated clients throughout the state of Utah. Therapist-led support groups: this free support group was led by a professional mental health therapist and held virtually to serve as many people as possible throughout the state. This program started in october and served 35 people. Education consultations: this free service grants clients the opportunity to have a one-on-one session with a staff member who can guide them to resources to ease the challenging journey of infertility. 13 people were served. Educational podcast dedicated to infertility reached 139 people. Social media and facebook support group monitoring: our social media presence provides support and a platform for individuals to ask questions of us and their peers. Our average engagement is 2,614 members. Mental health therapy: we provide specialized mental health therapy for people experiencing infertility. This unique specialty provides a safe place for people to work with the social and emotional side of infertility. We provided 312 sessions to 52 unduplicated clients. Advocacy: attending public events such as mental health awareness fairs, hogle zoo family day. Invited to teach church and mental health groups about the physical, social and mental effects of infertility. 200 people served. Wellness events: provided yoga and other events such as embryo storage webinar free of charge to the public. 11 people served.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 65% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 64% for direct work, and 36% for 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 total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 93
  • Transparency & Controls: 88
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 4
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 91.4%; rating input score 91
  • Fundraising efficiency: $29.29 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 97.1%; rating input score 97; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 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: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -122.6%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 16.3%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 15.4% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.2% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1.9% per year; rating input score 0; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 91.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $280K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $31K · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 26 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2018 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 2/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 23/100.