Reproductive Health Technologies Project Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
521769925
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2016
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2025304401
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Alliance/Advocacy Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,187,784
Expenses
$880,442
Assets
$936,239
Liabilities
$110,844

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JESSICA ARONS (PRESIDENT / CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • JESSICA ARONS (PRESIDENT / CEO): $147,353 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of the project is to advance the ability of every woman of any age to achieve full reproductive freedom with access to the safest, most effective, appropiate and acceptable technologies for ensuring her own and controlling her fertility. To fulfill this mission, we seek to build consensus in support of an education, research and advocacy agenda for reproductive health and reproductive freedom. We seek consensus through a process of dialogue among diverse communities about technological developments and their global implications.

What it reported doing in 2016

Contraceptive technologies: the project seeks to improve the climate for research, development and marketing of reproductive health technologies so women and men have increased access to technologies that can help prevent unintended pregnancy. The project monitors the product development pipeline in both the private and public sector; translates new research findings for clinical or policy applications; and advocates for more resources for research and access to prevention services and technologies. In addition, the project works to ensure the integrity and independence of the u.s. National system of scientific advisory committees and peer-review study sections which inform federal policy and/or guide federally funded research and development.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% 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

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. 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: 44
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 63
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 36.9%; rating input score 37
  • Program expense ratio: 49.7%; rating input score 50
  • Fundraising efficiency: $21.38 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • 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: 8 of 8 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: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 25.9%; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.06; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.12; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 16.7%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1.3% per year; rating input score 0; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.5% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 36.9% of revenue deployed · 49.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments · $437K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $147K · 16 people listed
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2011 to 2016
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 37/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 50/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 48/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 17/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 47/100.