Bay Area Lyme Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
453715012
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Portola Valley, CA, USA
Phone
6505302439
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Private Grantmaking Foundations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,267,803
Expenses
$1,900,217
Assets
$1,626,286
Liabilities
$1,158,549

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LAURE WOODS (PRESIDENT)
  • LINDA GIAMPA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR/SECRETARY)

Highest reported compensation

  • LINDA GIAMPA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR/SECRETARY): $276,479 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 bay area lyme foundation's mission is (1) to accelerate the development of reliable diagnostic tools for all stages of lyme disease and a cure for late stage lyme through funding innovative scientific research; and (2) to foster prevention through education and awareness building.

What it reported doing in 2024

As an independent nonprofit organization, bay area lyme is able to partner with leading researchers and institutions all across the country to support the most innovative and promising projects in lyme disease research, regardless of affiliation. True breakthroughs will occur only through well-designed research projects and at bay area lyme, we have a rigorous screening and monitoring process, grant contingencies, and project reporting, to ensure that projects are effectively designed and funds well spent. In 2024, bay area lyme foundation funded 2 grants in the amounts of $379,172 and $100,000 to two institutions across the country for a total of $479,172. $379,172 was awarded to projects focused on improved diagnostics of lyme disease and other tick-borne infections; $100,000 awarded to improve therapies, and the remaining grants for ecology and awareness projects. Duke university received a grant of $370,447 to continue the work of the late dr. Neil spector on lyme disease. The 2024 emerging leader award totaling $150,000 was awarded to a therapies project at tufts university.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 60% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 78% 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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and assets have declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 78
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 47
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 82.8%; rating input score 83
  • Program expense ratio: 78%; rating input score 78
  • Fundraising efficiency: $14.37 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 99.8%; rating input score 100; 41st 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: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 16.2%; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.86; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.71; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 14.5%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.2% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.4% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1.1% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 82.8% of revenue deployed · 78% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $1.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $276K · 4 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2016 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 10 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 11 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 49/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 32/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 13/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 19/100.