Diabetic Partners Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
464028469
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2015
Forms available
Form 990 2015
Location
San Marcos, CA, USA
Phone
6193319533
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Digestive Diseases, Disorders

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$48,719
Expenses
$83,111
Assets
$28,020
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • RON BLACKBURN (PRESIDENT)
  • CRAIG DENNIS (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • ROBERT HEINRICH (CFO): $1,570 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To work in partnership with educational and healthcare professionals to facilitate diabetic education and access to diabetic devices and health access to all persons regardless of location, financial means or status.

What it reported doing in 2015

Funds were provided to a non profit organization in southeast asia for the treatment of diabetic patients. The organization also partnered with huntington orthpedic outreach program, an international healthcare organization specializing in treating injuries to the joints and lower limbs. Educational and prevention information was provided to this organization for distribution to diabetes patients. This organization is active in central africa, costa rica and the fiji islands.

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 91% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 56
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 26
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 97.2%; rating input score 97
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 22nd 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: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Pass
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 89.1%; rating input score 89; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -70.6%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.34; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.9%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.2% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -22.4% per year; rating input score 0; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 45.6% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 97.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $81K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $2K · 5 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 17 of 18 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2013 to 2015
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 10 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 9 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: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 23/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 13/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 22/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.