Dr Alfred a Kuehn Innovation Institute

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
932718987
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2023
Location
Tarentum, PA, USA
Phone
4124540236
Rating
38
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Research Institutes and Public Policy Analysis

Reported finances

Revenue
$840,197
Expenses
$86,808
Assets
$104,006,607
Liabilities
$1,114

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MARGARET BORIGHT (DIRECTOR AND PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • STEPHEN GONGAWARE (DIRECTOR AND VP): $282,554 total reported compensation
  • PATRICK GALLAGHER (DIRECTOR, SECRETARY, AND T): $219,962 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The corporation is incorporated under the nonprofit corporation law of 1988 of the commonwealth of Pennsylvania and shall be operated exclusively to promote social welfare within the meaning of section 501(c)(4) of the internal revenue code, for any lawful purpose, including but not limited to (i) conducting studies and research using advanced data analytical techniques, and (ii) promoting and influencing public policies, which shall include influencing legislation and lobbying to the extent permitted by applicable law regulating the institute, with the objective of improving the health and wellness in the general human population, and may also be used for the administrative expenses of the institute.

What it reported doing in 2024

The organization received funding in december 1, 2023 and began activities to establish itself, including submittal of IRS and other forms. The directors also began an outreach to individuals and organizations to explore groups to partner with or potentially fund. The purpose of the institute is to conduct studies and research using advanced data analytical techniques with the objective of improving the health and wellness in the general population. The organization will promote and influence public policies, including influencing legislation and lobbying to the extent permitted by applicable law regulating the institute, in support of the objective.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 9
  • Transparency & Controls: 62
  • Accountability: 45
  • Sustainability: 86
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 2.4%; rating input score 2
  • Program expense ratio: 23%; rating input score 23
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 50%; rating input score 50; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 89.7%; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1,198.12; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 62.8%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 145.3% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -196.8% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.6% per year; rating input score 100; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 2.4% of revenue deployed · 23% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 4 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $20K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $283K · 4 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 19 of 19 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2023 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 3 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 2/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 23/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 50/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.