Obi Foundation for Bioesthetic

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
202268143
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Union, MO, USA
Phone
8004386441
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Management & Technical Assistance

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$567,991
Expenses
$530,519
Assets
$627,802
Liabilities
$166,445

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DAVID S MACLEAN DDS (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • DR RICHARD CHRISTENSEN (DIRECTOR)
  • DR MICHAEL EDWARDS (VICE PRESIDE)
  • BERNARD EGGER MDT BDT (DIRECTOR/OFF)

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 foundations mission is to promote the health benefits of bioesthetic dentistry worldwide through education, research and service to the dental profession and to the public. The organization offers education and training programs for dental professionals

What it reported doing in 2024

Training and education related to bioesthetic dentistry. Obi foundation's emphasis is on the benefits of early diagnosis and prevention of dental system breakdown. The foundation does this with unique "hands on" training and treating actual patients from the dentists own practice. Through the obi educational process, which is based on the optimal biologic form of the chewing system, students become adept at system diagnosis with the ability to help patients of all ages in the most conservative manner that will achieve lasting natural beauty and healthy form and function.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 92% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 75
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 41
  • Sustainability: 52
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 82.2%; rating input score 82
  • Program expense ratio: 87.5%; rating input score 88
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 50%; rating input score 50; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 6.6%; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.18; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.27; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.4% per year; rating input score 100; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.4% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.8% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 82.2% of revenue deployed · 87.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 10 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $464K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 50/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 54/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 48/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 27/100.