Diabetes Research Assistance Fund Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
710992728
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2014
Forms available
Form 990 2014
Location
Glendale, AZ, USA
Phone
6233760727
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Digestive Disease, Disorder Research

Reported finances

Revenue
$568,722
Expenses
$595,770
Assets
$75,650
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DON AIME (PRESIDENT)
  • LINDA SMITH (V PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • DON AIME (PRESIDENT)
  • LINDA SMITH (V PRESIDENT)
  • TINA ANSON (TREAS/SEC)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Funds scientific research grants. Provides medical supplies and equipment to programs that treat diabetes and other chronic diseases. Sponsors diabetes education, information and nutritional programs.

What it reported doing in 2014

The Organization provided for in-kind shipments of medical supplies, pharmaceuticals, medicines, hygene and household goods, and clothing to Esperanza De Vida in Guatemala in November 2014 who provides ongoing medical care to the needy and disadvantaged people of their areas. The regions they serve are some of over twenty targeted areas by the World Health Organization to combat degenerative diseases such as diabetes. Some of these diseases are spreading at epidemic rates. The lack of properly equipped medical facilities and medical supplies further contributes to the ongoing challenge of saving lives - - especially the children, elderly and the handicapped. thousands were served by these in-kind contributions

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 94% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 98
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 33
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 98.3%; rating input score 98
  • Fundraising efficiency: $151.25 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Fail
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 96.2%; rating input score 96; 38th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: -4.8%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.13; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 132.8% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 153.5% per year; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -31.4% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 98.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $586K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 23 of 24 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and grants
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2013 to 2014
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 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.

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: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 22/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 6/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.