Foundation for Applied Molecular Evolution Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
593471957
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Alachua, FL, USA
Phone
3864188085
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Scholarships, Student Financial Aid Services, Awards

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,638,850
Expenses
$3,252,742
Assets
$2,727,025
Liabilities
$416,428

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • STEVEN BENNER (BOARD CHAIR & CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • STEVEN BENNER (BOARD CHAIR & CEO): $180,720 total reported compensation
  • NIGEL RICHARDS (DIRECTOR): $38,275 total reported compensation
  • ANDREW ELLINGTON (DIRECTOR): $1,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The foundation provides an innovative environment to host the scientific and technological research of a small group of selected molecular and life scientists to meet opportunities in commerce and medicine.

What it reported doing in 2025

The organization has conducted a number of research projects.1r01ai135146-01a1 diagnostics and surveillance for low-resource environments. The aims of this project are to explore and develop faster and less expensive diagnostics tools and to increase the robustness of multiplex pathogen detection products.1r61ca291117-01 evolved molecules that destroy cancer relevant proteins. The technology to be developed here will create a new capability, reagents that not only bind a target protein, but also cleave it, to be available from suppliers in weeks (not months) at 10-100 fold lower cost than antibodies.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 99% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 75
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 66
  • Sustainability: 46
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 89.1%; rating input score 89
  • Program expense ratio: 76.6%; rating input score 77
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 75th 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; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • 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: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 10.6%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.84; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.15; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.9%; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.4% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.5% per year; rating input score 100; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.8% per year; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 89.1% of revenue deployed · 76.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 4 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $181K · 4 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $234K reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 50/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 28/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 57/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Audit committee oversight not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 40/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 51/100.