International Urogynecological Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
364045817
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Burnsville, MN, USA
Phone
9526831878
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Adult, Continuing Education

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,651,271
Expenses
$1,828,602
Assets
$2,873,256
Liabilities
$317,821

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Alfredo L Milani (President)
  • Anna Rosamilia (Vice President)
  • Jorge Milhem Haddad (Past President)
  • Corie Pel (Executive Director)
  • David Casalod (Former Executive Director)

People named in this filing

  • Alfredo L Milani (President)
  • Anna Rosamilia (Vice President)
  • Lisa T Prodigalidad (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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The Organization is dedicated to the advancement of urogynecological knowledge around the world through education and the promotion of basic and clinical research on disorders of the female pelvic floor.

What it reported doing in 2024

Annual professional scientific meetings and smaller symposia and exchange programs.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 66% 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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 68
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 39
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 80.1%; rating input score 80
  • Program expense ratio: 71.3%; rating input score 71
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 84.6%; rating input score 85; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Pass
    • 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: 72.8%; rating input score 73; 33rd 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: 7 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -10.7%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.57; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.11; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -5.2% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -5% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.6% per year; rating input score 100; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 80.1% of revenue deployed · 71.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 7 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $1.1M reported
  • Consistency: 26 of 28 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and grants
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 2 filed related-organization links
  • 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 — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 16/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 57/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 41/100.