Dr Interns Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
274373633
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2016
Location
Trenton, NJ, USA
Rating
61
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Job Training

Reported finances

Revenue
$11,512
Expenses
$7,518
Assets
$115,137
Liabilities
$2,036

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

People named in this filing

  • KETAN PATEL (BOARD OF DIRECTOR)
  • Disha Goswami (BOARD OF DIRECTOR)
  • BRIAN SNYDER (BOARD OF 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 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Provide medical treatment to general public

What it reported doing in 2016

Provide medical care to people of ecucador and india

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 61% for direct work, and 39% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 69
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 6
  • Sustainability: 73
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 65.3%; rating input score 65
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • 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: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 34.7%; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 15.31; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -31.4% per year; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -24.4% per year; rating input score 0; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 22.5% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 65.3% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 3 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $8K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 16 of 17 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2012 to 2016
  • 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grants require schedule f did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 30/100.