Niekro Aneurysm and Avm Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
421740818
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2011
Location
Houston, TX, USA
Phone
2815435251
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and/or Fund Distribution

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$252,971
Expenses
$250,023
Assets
$237,134
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ELIZABETH HAMBURG (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • JEFFREY MAYER (CHAIRPERSON/PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • ELIZABETH HAMBURG (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $90,385 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The niekro aneurysm & avm foundation is committed to supporting patients and families, research, treatment, and awareness of brain aneurysms, avms and strokes. Provide education of the risk factors, causes and treatments of these conditions while funding neurological research.

What it reported doing in 2024

Research- the niekro aneurysm & avm foundation is committed to funding research regarding early detection and to further advance the treatement of aneurysms/avms/strokes. The grant application process is overseen by the tjne research steering committee who work directly with the tnjf medical advisory board in reviewing all grants received during the application submission period. Final grant approvals and funding amounts are decided upon by the board of directors and any funds allocated must be used for research. A signed agreement of mutual responsibility is required by tjnf to assure the funds are used as applied for.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 73% for direct work, and 27% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 71
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 42
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 73.7%; rating input score 74
  • Program expense ratio: 74.5%; rating input score 75
  • Fundraising efficiency: $13.13 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th 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: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: 1.2%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.95; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 36.2%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.8% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.5% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 73.7% of revenue deployed · 74.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $186K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $90K · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 47/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 42/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 39/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.