New Haven Innovation Labs Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 873267187
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2022–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- New Haven, CT, USA
- Phone
- 2035629901
- Rating
- 57
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Economic Development
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $978,044
- Expenses
- $978,044
- Assets
- $169,540
- Liabilities
- $169,540
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
5 people listed
Highest reported compensation
- MICHELE SOLOMON (DIRECTOR): $234,829 total reported compensation
- JOHN GEIBEL (PAST DIRECTOR): $220,837 total reported compensation
- CHRISTOPHER VENDOLA (PAST DIRECTOR): $166,830 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To promote, support and further the economic health and development of the city of new haven and its regions thereby relieving governmental burdens, to advance science by engaging in efforts to support biomedical and other scientific research and to benefit its sole member the john b. Pierce laboratory, inc. (a 501(c)(3) organization). The corporation's activities include operating an incubator facility for start-up and fledgling companies engaged in bio-scientific research and supporting such research, engaging in other activities that support job creation, promoting collaboration and sharing of knowledge among scientists and advancing education and training to local students in bioscience and research.
What it reported doing in 2024
Operating an incubator facility for start-up and fledgling companies engaged in bio-scientific research and supporting such research, engaging in other activities that support job creation, promoting collaboration and sharing of knowledge among scientists, advancing education and training to local students in bioscience and research and to benefit its sole member the john b. Pierce laboratory, inc. ( a 501(c)(3) organization).
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.
The verdict
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most filed governance safeguards are in place. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 49
- Transparency & Controls: 68
- Accountability: 61
- Sustainability: 24
- Growth: 80
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 55.4%; rating input score 55
- Program expense ratio: 55.4%; rating input score 55
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
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: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 33.3%; rating input score 33; 10th 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 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.17; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 1; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 10.2%; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 74.4% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 39.9% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -33.1% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 55.4% of revenue deployed · 55.4% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 1 of 3 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $542K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $235K · 5 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
- Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 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.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 55/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 33/100.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 55/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 36/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 8/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 6/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 36/100.