International Qsar Foundation to Reduce
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 050578022
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2010–2012
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2012
- Location
- Two Harbors, MN, USA
- Phone
- 2185257749
- Rating
- 82
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Animal Protection and Welfare
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $9,087
- Expenses
- $112,051
- Assets
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2012. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
6 people listed
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2012. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The international qsar foundation to reduce animal testing was created to accelerate the development of qsar methods for use in safety assessment and product discovery programs. In addition to funding new qsar research, the foundation hosts independent peer consultations on existing qsar models which show promise for estimating specific regulatory endpoints. These peer consultations provide an independent critique of qsar models and a roadmap for improving them in the near future.
What it reported doing in 2012
Effectopedia project: effectopedia is a web domain registered by iqf for the distribution of this software for compiling and documenting adverse outcome pathways. It is now recognized as a critical tool in risk assessment by the oecd in paris. Oecd has suggested the 34 member countries use effectopedia for encoding their adverse outcome pathways information. Effectopedia is being released as a free download on the iqf website (www.qsari.org), and the development of this software was the flagship project for the iqf for the past year.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 89% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 98% 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
STRONG - 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: 99
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 1
- Growth: 0
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 97.3%; rating input score 97
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -1,133.1%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: Limited
Growth
- Program expense growth: -12.6% per year; rating input score 0; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -42.4% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -32.3% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 97.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 5 filed program accomplishments · $109K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 3 filing years from 2010 to 2012
- 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.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.