Pennington Biomedical Research Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
581767810
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Baton Rouge, LA, USA
Phone
2257632500
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Biomedicine, Bioengineering Research

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,483,977
Expenses
$4,163,749
Assets
$29,642,935
Liabilities
$7,473,585

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

Leadership & pay

24 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JANET L OLSON (PRESIDENT/CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • BRIANNA BARRETT (CHIEF DEVELOPMENT OFFICER): $256,778 total reported compensation
  • ANDRE GREENE (CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER (THRU 11/24)): $165,102 total reported compensation
  • JANET L OLSON (PRESIDENT/CEO): $94,208 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 mission of the pennington biomedical research foundation is to support the work of lsu's pennington biomedical research center, which aims to discover the triggers of chronic diseases through innovative reasearch that improves human health.

What it reported doing in 2024

Pennington biomedical research foundation provides the pennington biomedical research center with programmatic funding for three major areas: priority research programs that address the urgent scientific needs of its research enterprise, deploy proactive business development in an effort to enhance revenue generation to provide long-term financial stability and health, and position the research center as the world leader in obesity and chronic disease through a targeted communications and branding initiative.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - 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: 66
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 60
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 79.8%; rating input score 80
  • Program expense ratio: 63.1%; rating input score 63
  • Fundraising efficiency: $1.53 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.7%; rating input score 95; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • 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: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • 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: 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: 7.1%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 7.12; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.25; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12.4%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.3% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.6% per year; rating input score 100; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.8% per year; rating input score 100; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 79.8% of revenue deployed · 63.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 21 of 21 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $2.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $257K · 24 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $374K reported
  • Consistency: 35 of 36 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 4 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 4/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 56/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D expense reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 24/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 38/100.