Biostart

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
311448221
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2011
Forms available
Form 990 2011
Location
Cincinnati, OH, USA
Phone
5136591572
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Economic Development

Reported finances

Revenue
$602,800
Expenses
$561,847
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$1,875,542

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2011. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

22 people listed

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2011. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Biostart was a world-class life science start-up center with two distinguishing focus areas; catalyst and community. For over a decade this dual focused approach has benefited our clients, the region and state by transforming technology into products. We build life science companies that create jobs, products and services that improve health and quality of life and create wealth for the community.

What it reported doing in 2011

Provide and maintain wet lab facilities and shared technical equipment at below market rates.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 93
  • Accountability: 87
  • Sustainability: 32
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 12th 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: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 95.5%; rating input score 95; 26th 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: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 6.8%; rating input score 64; 64th 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: 19.4%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -40.4% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -102.1% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 21 of 22 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $464K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $109K · 22 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed
  • Consistency: 16 of 17 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2009 to 2011
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.

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 — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 13/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.