The Howard and Georgeanna Jones Foundation for Reproductive Medicine

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
541265842
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Virginia Beach, VA, USA
Phone
7579610222
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Private Independent Foundations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$552,658
Expenses
$535,895
Assets
$1,074,599
Liabilities
$2,834

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Mary F Davies (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Mary F Davies (President): $90,809 total reported compensation
  • Susan L Crockin (Director): $40,570 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 howard and georgeanna jones foundation for reproductive medicine is a not-for-profit organization which solicits funds from the general public to support scientific and medical research in the field of reproductive medicine. In addition to providing research grants to deserving scientific investigators, the foundation's board of directors is prepared to serve in an advisory capacity to the agencies it supports. The foundation may also sponsor seminars which would be designed to evaluate public policy issues related to reproductive medicine in order to educate the general public and attempt to improve the human condition.

What it reported doing in 2024

Research funding allocated to various universities and medical schools within the united states of america.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 65% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 64% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 78
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Accountability: 93
  • Sustainability: 51
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 82.2%; rating input score 82
  • Program expense ratio: 82.1%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: $11.75 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 47.7%; rating input score 48; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 21st 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: 3%; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.01; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 24.5%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.7% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.4% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -5.1% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 82.2% of revenue deployed · 82.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 16 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $440K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $91K · 16 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 27 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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.

  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 48/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 43/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 45/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 10/100.