Sanford Research North Formerly Known as Neuropsychiatric Research Institute

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
450274828
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2017
Forms available
Form 990 2017
Location
Fargo, ND, USA
Phone
7012931335
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Neurology, Neuroscience Research

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,043,326
Expenses
$3,044,920
Assets
$3,399,370
Liabilities
$606,994

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ROSS CROSBY PHD (VICE PRESIDENT FOR RESEARCH)
  • BRIAN PETERSON (VICE PRESIDENT FOR ADMINIS)
  • STEPHEN WONDERLICH PHD (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • STEPHEN WONDERLICH PHD (PRESIDENT): $244,310 total reported compensation
  • ROSS CROSBY PHD (VICE PRESIDENT FOR RESEARCH): $187,819 total reported compensation
  • SCOTT ENGEL (SCIENTIST): $121,411 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of sanford research north is to improve the health status of individuals. This will be done by enhancing clinical expertise through education, research and service.

What it reported doing in 2017

Sanford research north is a non-profit biomedical research institute that performs medical research in the neurosciences. This research includes clinical behavior research in the area of eating disorders as well as basic science research on the physiological aspects of eating and addiction. The institute also participates in clinics and educational activities within the community.

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.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. The required major-donor schedule is missing or incomplete and some related-organization disclosures are missing.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 69
  • Transparency & Controls: 63
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 36
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 78%; rating input score 78
  • Program expense ratio: 76.2%; rating input score 76
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • 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: No; rating input score 0
  • Related-party transparency: Scored; rating input score 0

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: -0.1%; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.12; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.18; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 22%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 11.3% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.8% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 78% of revenue deployed · 76.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $244K · 11 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $234K reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2011 to 2017
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Major donor itemization scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 32/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 47/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 52/100.