Doctors United for Ukraine Co

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
881488412
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Guilford, CT, USA
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
International Relief

Reported finances

Revenue
$55,606
Expenses
$47,745
Assets
$39,580
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ALLA VASH-MARGITA MD (President)
  • ANDREY ZINCHUK MD (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • ALLA VASH-MARGITA MD (President)
  • ANDREY ZINCHUK MD (Vice President)
  • STEN VERMUND MD PHD (Director)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Yale University's Ukrainian-born faculty formed the United for Ukraine Task Force. Participation in the campaign is filling a critical gap in Ukraine by meeting specific needs of hospitals in Ukraine.

What it reported doing in 2025

Doctors United for Ukraine Co provides emergency and operating room supplies and educational assistance to doctors and other medical facilities in Ukraine.

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 99% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

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: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 49
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 53
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 83.9%; rating input score 84
  • Program expense ratio: 97.7%; rating input score 98
  • Fundraising efficiency: $62.41 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 81.8%; rating input score 82; 3rd 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: 0%; rating input score 0; 23rd 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: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: 14.1%; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.83; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -61.1% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -99.1% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 25.2% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 83.9% of revenue deployed · 97.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 15 of 17 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2022 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 25/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule M noncash within contributions did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.