Innovating Health International Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
474984588
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2021
Forms available
Form 990 2021, Form 990-N 2015
Location
Miami Beach, FL, USA
Phone
3059846249
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Relief

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$847,849
Expenses
$899,803
Assets
$213,704
Liabilities
$310,500

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2021. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • VINCENT A DEGENNARO JR (CEO)

People named in this filing

  • VINCENT A DEGENNARO JR (CEO)
  • JACK BREWER (DIRECTOR)
  • RONALD GIFFLER (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 2021. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Innovating health international (ihi) is a non-profit dedicated to treating chronic diseases and addressing women's health issues in haiti and malawi. What we do- working with local partners, we aim to increase access to treatment and education services for chronic diseases such as cancer, high blood pressure, diabetes and injuries. Current projects include a women's cancer center, a large cancer awareness program, opening a pathology laboratory, and helping to build a national comprehensive cancer program. What innovating health looks like- collaboration and discovery are at the heart of our practice and guide our organization's ethos. Innovating health means learning with others to bring our expertise in medical care, social engagement, community based research and problem solving into different contexts. We strive to create new and hybrid models of healthcare and engagement that do not seek to simply 'build capacity' but respond to local needs through constant iteration.

What it reported doing in 2021

Women's cancer awareness programwe have held dozens of awareness events and reached 11 institutions with our awareness message. We have also: a. Distributed 10,000 awareness booklets for breast and cervical cancer. B. Sensitized over 7,000 people on breast and cervical cancer awareness, prevention, and screening port au prince. D. Gave 8 interviews on haitian tv and radio about breast and cervical cancer.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 67% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 79
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 19
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 95.4%; rating input score 95
  • Program expense ratio: 78%; rating input score 78
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 84.6%; rating input score 85; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Limited
    • Conducts field audits: Limited
    • May suspend future funding: Limited
    • Requires financial reports: Limited
    • Conducts site visits: Limited
    • Requires grant agreements: Limited
    • May require repayment: 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -6.1%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.24; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.45; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 14.2% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.9% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.8% per year; rating input score 100; 27th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 95.4% of revenue deployed · 78% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $702K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 24 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2016 to 2021
  • 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.

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

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 15/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 8/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 3/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.