Center for Innovative Public Health Research
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 200165973
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2012–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- San Clemente, CA, USA
- Phone
- 8773026858
- Rating
- 67
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Research Institutes and/or Public Policy Analysis
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $4,716,466
- Expenses
- $4,682,157
- Assets
- $2,101,178
- Liabilities
- $2,029,551
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
11 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- MICHELE YBARRA (CEO)
- DANIEL PERCIVAL (PRESIDENT)
- JOE SCHWAB (FORMER CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- MICHELE YBARRA (CEO): $267,348 total reported compensation
- ALEX D HO (SOFTWARE DEVELOPER): $182,710 total reported compensation
- ANDREW HUANG (SOFTWARE DEVELOPER): $159,470 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Our vision is to promote positive human development through the creation and implementation of innovation and unique technology-based research and health education programs. Public health is ever evolving and so are we.
What it reported doing in 2024
In 2024, ciphr led 6 nih-funded research grants and also played key roles on 3 additional nih-funded grants led by researchers at other institutions. Across all projects, more than 5,000 young people were engaged in research activities (e.g., surveys. Behavior change interventions) during the year, and ciphr researchers authored or co-authored five scientific papers published in peer-reviewed journals.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Grant-funded. 99% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
- 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 most voting board members are independent. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 74
- Transparency & Controls: 47
- Accountability: 84
- Sustainability: 24
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 82.7%; rating input score 83
- Program expense ratio: 83.2%; rating input score 83
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
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: Scored; rating input score 0
- Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
- 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: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 62
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Limited
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Fail
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 0.7%; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.45; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.97; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 15.9%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 12.4% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 12.6% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 20.1% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 82.7% of revenue deployed · 83.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $3.9M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $267K · 11 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 23 of 23 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and executive pay
- Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
- 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.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 36/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 15/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 6/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 17/100.