Ernest Gallo Clinic and Research Center

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
942697305
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2014
Forms available
Form 990 2014
Location
Emeryville, CA, USA
Phone
4153024044
Rating
61
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Research Institutes and/or Public Policy Analysis

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,481,173
Expenses
$2,566,344
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • JOHN A DE LUCA (CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD): $902,855 total reported compensation
  • NANCY GREEN (VP OF ADMIN): $612,365 total reported compensation
  • SUSAN W LEE (ASSISTANT CONTROLLER): $540,402 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Research relating to alcoholism, substance abuse and related conditions.

What it reported doing in 2014

See schedule omedical research, general/other: the work of the ernest gallo clinic and research center is intended to lead to an understanding of the neurological effects of ethanol and substances of abuse and to the development of medications for the treatment of addiction and other neuropsychiatric conditions. Long-term objectives include blocking and reversing the effects of alcohol and substances of abuse in the brain and identifying medications useful for the treatment of substance use disorders, post-traumatic stress and related conditions. Several research projects are currently in progress and are being funded principally by grants from the state of California, the national institute on alcohol abuse and alcoholism (niaaa), the national institute of drug abuse (nida), the national institute of neurological disorders and stroke (ninds), the national institute of mental health (nimh), and the u.s. Department of defense. Gallo center faculty also participate in the teaching program of the university of California, san francisco. (33 publications)

Operating model

Revenue model
Affiliate-supported. 71% of the money available for current operations came from contributions from related organizations.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 58
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 72
  • Sustainability: 0
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 77.4%; rating input score 77
  • Program expense ratio: 44.7%; rating input score 45
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: -73.3%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 127.1%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -135.9% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -26.1% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -32.7% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 77.4% of revenue deployed · 44.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 3 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $903K · 9 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.3M reported
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2009 to 2014
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 7 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 45/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.
  • High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is recorded as not currently operating in California.