Intellectual Property Owners Education Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
522250648
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2025074500
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Management & Technical Assistance

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$565,891
Expenses
$574,871
Assets
$1,081,601
Liabilities
$220,841

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

28 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • HENRY HADAD (PRESIDENT)
  • SCOTT BARKER (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • JESSICA LANDACRE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • JESSICA LANDACRE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $550,014 total reported compensation
  • SAMANTHA J AGUAYO (DEP E.D. & CHIEF POLICY COUNSEL): $382,117 total reported compensation
  • THOMAS S VALENTE (SENIOR COUNSEL, GLOBAL AFFAIRS): $378,631 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Intellectual property owners education foundation is a non-profit organization devoted to educational and charitable activities designed to promote the value of intellectual property rights. The organization strives to promote an understanding of intellectual property laws and their value to society. The foundation accomplishes its goals through a variety of activities including the preparation of educational materials, the conduct of educational seminars, and the presentation of awards and scholarships.

What it reported doing in 2024

Inventor of the year (december 12, 2024) the foundation gives an annual award to the most outstanding inventor of a recent, patented invention that exemplifies modern ingenuity. The purpose of the award is to educate the public about inventors and patents, and how inventions benefit the economy and quality of life. Nominees are solicited from industry, government, independent inventors, academia, and other sources in all fields of technology. The winner is selected by the board of directors of the foundation. The 2024 award was given at an awards ceremony on december 12 and includes a plaque and tribute video. The foundation announces winners in advance of the awards ceremony and during the remainder of the year to increase public awareness of recent inventors.

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 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 74
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 37
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 78.1%; rating input score 78
  • Program expense ratio: 75.7%; rating input score 76
  • Fundraising efficiency: $14.35 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • 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: 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: Fail
    • 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: -1.6%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.88; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.2; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 57.1%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.6% per year; rating input score 100; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.7% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.3% per year; rating input score 100; 22nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 78.1% of revenue deployed · 75.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 21 of 21 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments · $435K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $550K · 28 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 49/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 31/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 31/100.