Alfred E Mann Institute for Biomedical Engineering at the Usc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
954684347
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2022
Forms available
Form 990 2022
Location
Los Angeles, CA, USA
Phone
2138211900
Rating
55
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Biomedicine, Bioengineering Research

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,344,640
Expenses
$3,252,580
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • CAROL FOLT (DIRECTOR): $4,628,109 total reported compensation
  • CHRYSOSTOMOS L NIKIAS (FORMER CHAIRMAN): $3,101,492 total reported compensation
  • CHARLES F ZUKOSKI (CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD): $2,199,544 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

See schedule o

What it reported doing in 2022

To promote and expand human knowledge in the biomedical and other scientific fields by actively conducting biomedical and scientific research and development at the university of southern California.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 96% 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

MIXED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 62
  • Transparency & Controls: 68
  • Accountability: 46
  • Sustainability: 21
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 68.5%; rating input score 69
  • Program expense ratio: 70.5%; rating input score 70
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 44.4%; rating input score 44; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Limited
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 2.8%; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 47.8%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -15.4% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -6.8% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -12.4% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 68.5% of revenue deployed · 70.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 9 board members independent · 4 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $4.6M · 14 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $3M reported
  • Consistency: 17 of 17 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2017 to 2022
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 44/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 44/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is recorded as not currently operating in California.