International Bone and Mineral Society

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
522198569
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2017
Forms available
Form 990 2017
Location
Chicago, IL, USA
Phone
3126734973
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Democracy & Civil Society Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$-4,329
Expenses
$149,397
Assets
$1,018,520
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Theresa Guise (PAST PRESIDENT)
  • Anna Teti (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • John Eisman (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • Theresa Guise (PAST PRESIDENT)
  • ralph mueller (DIRECTOR)
  • richard eastell (SECRETARY/TREASURER)

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 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To faciliate the generation and dispersal of knowledge of bone and mineral metabolism through communication, community, training, and multidisciplinary meetings internationally.

What it reported doing in 2017

Journal - the ibms bonekey journal is to provide a breadth and depth of coverage of the bone field, including coverage of clinical topics such as osteoporosis diagnosis and management, genetics, fracture repair and biomechanics, bone and cancer, as well as basic science subjects such as bone cell and molecular biology. Ibms bonekey provides the bone field with an online platform for scientific exchange and community growth based on expert scientific content. Ibms bonekey is published by nature publishing group on behalf of the international bone and mineral society.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 77% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% 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 program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 85
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 33
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 87.4%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: -3,551.1%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 6.82; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -45.7% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -36.6% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -15.2% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 87.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $131K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 19 of 19 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes foreign activity
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2011 to 2017
  • 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.

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 57/100.