Pro Bono Advisory Council
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 474773103
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2018–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2023, Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2021
- Location
- St Louis, MO, USA
- Phone
- 6126705307
- Rating
- 59
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Professional Societies, Associations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $35,340
- Expenses
- $26,279
- Assets
- $46,140
- Liabilities
- $48,561
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
14 people listed
People named in this filing
- JAMES PATTERSON (CHAIRMAN)
- WARREN TUTTLE (VICE CHAIR)
- KIRK DAMMAN (SECRETARY)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The mission of the pro bono advisory committee is to assist the united states patent and trademark office (uspto) in fulfilling its mandate to work with and support intellectual property law associations in establishing pro bono programs to assist under-resourced investors.
What it reported doing in 2024
Through its relationship with the united states patent and trademark office, the pro bono advisory council coordinates year-round programs with 22 non-profit organizations that assist under-resourced innovators in bringing their ideas and products to market.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 63% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- 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
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 47
- Transparency & Controls: 74
- Sustainability: 62
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 46.3%; rating input score 46
- Program expense ratio: 49%; rating input score 49
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 25.6%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.76; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.05; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -1.6% per year; rating input score 0; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 17.7% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 29.6% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 46.3% of revenue deployed · 49% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $13K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 14 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 4 filing years from 2018 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
- 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: Mission deployment rate scored 46/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 49/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 5/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.