Multiple Myeloma Research Consortium Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
810640775
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2013
Forms available
Form 990 2013
Location
Norwalk, CT, USA
Phone
2039721250
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Cancer Research

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,017,668
Expenses
$4,016,445
Assets
$3,517,392
Liabilities
$1,272,146

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

25 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KATHY GIUSTI (CEO)
  • WALTER CAPONE (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • KATHY GIUSTI (CEO): $464,060 total reported compensation
  • WALTER CAPONE (PRESIDENT): $414,954 total reported compensation
  • BEVERLY HARRISON (VP OF CLINICAL DEVELOPMENT): $196,559 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To champion collaboration with and integration across academia and industry and to focus on speed and innovation to bring the most promising multiple myeloma treatments to patients faster.

What it reported doing in 2013

Mmrc tissue bank: the mmrc tissue bank is a centrally located, standardized tissue bank of highly annotated bone marrow and peripheral blood samples from myeloma patients and patients with myeloma related disorders. Housed at the mayo clinic, in scottsdale, Arizona, the tissue bank is the only resource of its kind that accrues samples provided by mmrc institutions under good laboratory practice (glp) standard procedures with the corresponding clinical data. The budget granted to the mayo scottsdale for the tissue bank enables the tissue to be uniformly processed and stored in adherence with glp standards and under the governance of more than 80 standard operating procedures. The mmrc has also established a quality assurance unit that performs regular internal reviews and issues quarterly quality assurance reports. The payments to mayo scottsdale reflect the standard costs to support the full time employees needed to perform the processing activities as well as variable charges depending on the actual number of samples sent to bank to be processed. The mmrc has a specifically designed tissue tracking system that collects information on the tissue samples with respect to processing and storage as well as comprehensive clinical data and medical histories on the de-identified patients who have provided samples. All data in the mmrc tissue tracking system is consistently collected and maintained using standardized processes that ensure data integrity. Furthermore, the data is collected and managed in a manner consistent with all regulatory requirements, including those of the u.s. Food and drug administration (fda), the health insurance portability and accountability act of 1996 (hipaa) and is compliant with other federal regulations. The costs associated with the tissue tracking system are distinct from the mmrc tissue bank and include a hosting service for the database, it support, and maintenance contracts for the software that supports the tissue tracking system. This specifically designed tissue tracking system enables scientists to perform customized and pre-configured queries on highly-annotated tissue samples, comprehensive clinical data and medical histories; functions that are essential in advancing the mmrc's pre-clinical projects, clinical trials, and correlative studies.

Operating model

Revenue model
Affiliate-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions from related organizations.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 69% for direct work, and 31% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 69
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 36
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 98.6%; rating input score 99
  • Program expense ratio: 98.6%; rating input score 99
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: 89.4%; rating input score 89; 23rd 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; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 0%; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.88; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.36; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8.3%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -7% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -19.1% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 98.6% of revenue deployed · 98.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 19 of 19 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $464K · 25 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $685K reported
  • Consistency: 26 of 27 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2010 to 2013
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 20 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 18 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 — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 35/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 41/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 27/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 38/100.