Global Liver Institute Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 464687212
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2016–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2014
- Location
- Washington, DC, USA
- Phone
- 8008455910
- Rating
- 69
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Education N.E.C.
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $3,426,579
- Expenses
- $3,393,587
- Assets
- $116,677
- Liabilities
- $757,260
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
20 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Donna R Cryer JD (Former Pres CEO)
- Larry Holden (President & CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- Donna R Cryer JD (Former Pres CEO): $272,905 total reported compensation
- Larry Holden (President & CEO): $252,549 total reported compensation
- Jeff McIntyre (VP, Liver Health Programs): $150,888 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Improve individual and public health by promoting innovation, collaboration, and scaling optimal approaches to eradicating liver diseases.
What it reported doing in 2024
Liver health is public health: the policy director in the u.s. and director of the European office helped gli accelerate its comprehensive liver health policy program in 2024. work products included policy assessment, monthly liver health policy update newsletters, website content, engagement of Fatty Liver council members, collaborative liver and public health advocacy partnerships, relationship building with government agencies, legislators, and potential collaborating organization, legislative briefings, and support of and by patient advocates.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 77% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- 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.
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: 80
- Transparency & Controls: 45
- Accountability: 87
- Sustainability: 18
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 90.1%; rating input score 90
- Program expense ratio: 90.9%; rating input score 91
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 13th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Missing
- Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
- Grant itemization coverage: 0%; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 84.6%; rating input score 85; 17th 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: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 1%; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.03; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 6.49; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 39.5%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 27.2% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 25.7% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 11.9% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 90.1% of revenue deployed · 90.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 11 of 13 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 7 filed program accomplishments · $3.1M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $273K · 20 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $162K reported
- Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and executive pay
- Filing history: 8 filing years from 2016 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 8 filed money-flow records
- 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 scored 0/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 37/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 3/100.