The Uab Research Foundation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 630952483
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2013–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Birmingham, AL, USA
- Phone
- 2059756068
- Rating
- 64
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $8,324,412
- Expenses
- $6,925,375
- Assets
- $18,748,409
- Liabilities
- $1,889,664
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
20 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- RAY WATTS (PRESIDENT/EX-OFFICIO/ BRD MBR)
- KATHY L NUGENT (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- ANUPAM AGARWAL (EX-OFFICIO/BOARD MEMBER): $1,445,066 total reported compensation
- RAY WATTS (PRESIDENT/EX-OFFICIO/ BRD MBR): $1,366,354 total reported compensation
- SID J TRANT (EX-OFFICIO/BOARD MEMBER): $900,706 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Foundation assists in the implementation of the patent policy at the university, including, but not limited to, assisting in the receipt and dissemination of materials, compounds and biological substances used in university research projects and evaluating the commercial potential of inventions created by university employees and students and the patentability and applicability of other protections with respect to such inventions. Necessary to this educational mission is the provision of outstanding medical care and services and the enhancement of new knowledge through clinical and basic biomedical research.
What it reported doing in 2024
The foundation reviews invention disclosures submitted at uab and initiates domestic and foreign patent filings when appropriate. The foundation negotiates, manages, and monitors research, option, and licensing agreements with outside parties on behalf of uab.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Other-operating. 92% of the money available for current operations came from other operating 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 the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 72
- Transparency & Controls: 60
- Accountability: 44
- Sustainability: 63
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 75.2%; rating input score 75
- Program expense ratio: 90.7%; rating input score 91
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Missing
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 35.3%; rating input score 35; 7th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 56
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 16.8%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.71; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.1; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 20.2%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 2.3% per year; rating input score 100; 24th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 1.5% per year; rating input score 100; 18th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 10.5% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 75.2% of revenue deployed · 90.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 6 of 17 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $6.3M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $1.4M · 20 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $753K reported
- Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
- Filing history: 12 filing years from 2013 to 2024
- 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.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 35/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 9 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 12/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 58/100.