Spring Point Project

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
201896813
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Minneapolis, MN, USA
Phone
6123334108
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Specifically Named Diseases Research

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,041,047
Expenses
$3,929,944
Assets
$9,351,163
Liabilities
$1,360,155

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • THOMAS SPIZZO (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • THOMAS SPIZZO (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $261,819 total reported compensation
  • GERALDINE HULLUM (DIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATION): $127,501 total reported compensation
  • MEGAN LARSON (DIRECTOR OF QUALITY): $121,359 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To be the preeminent source of medical-grade porcine clinically tissue utilized to cure diseases, with the primary commitment to diabetes.

What it reported doing in 2025

Bred and raised designated pathogen-free (dpf) medical-grade pigs for use in biomedical research to treat and potentially cure type 1 diabetes. Procured pancreata, isolated islets, and produced microencapsulated combination product to finalize investigational new drug (ind) submission and facilitate clinical studies. The long-term program objective is to produce a sufficient supply of suitable donor pigs to serve as islet donors for diabetic patients, ultimately leading to a practical cure for diabetes.to date, produced over three thousand three hundred dpf pigs and isolated over 207 million porcine islets from designated pathogen-free (dpf) animals produced at the organization's facility to support (1) preclinical transplantation and preparation for and the initiation of phase i/ii clinical activities and (2) the validation of the cgmp manufacturing of a clinically suitable product in the on-site cellular manufacturing facility.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 97% 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 most voting board members are independent. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 79
  • Transparency & Controls: 47
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 43
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 87.1%; rating input score 87
  • Program expense ratio: 92.4%; rating input score 92
  • Fundraising efficiency: $0.12 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • 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: 2.7%; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.38; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.15; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 13%; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.4% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.5% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.2% per year; rating input score 100; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 87.1% of revenue deployed · 92.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 5 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $3.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $262K · 9 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 33 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes foreign activity and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 1/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 36/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 26/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Independent members within voting members did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 41/100.