Ultra Accelerator Link Consortium Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
331375615
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Beaverton, OR, USA
Phone
5036190505
Rating
47
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Business and Industry

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,998,634
Expenses
$609,313
Assets
$2,769,624
Liabilities
$1,138,761

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • PETER ONUFRYK (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • KURTIS BOWMAN (BOARD CHAIR)
  • PETER ONUFRYK (PRESIDENT)
  • PRIYANK SHUKLA (SECRETARY)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

The corporation is a non-profit corporation formed for purposes that include, but are not limited to, creating, using, distributing, and/or publishing information, documentation, and/or other work products to develop and promote the adoption of openly accessible standard specifications related to scalable high-performance interconnects that enable communication among accelerators and related devices.

What it reported doing in 2025

Specification development activities: the corporation's ualink specifications are created through a process where members can openly and publicly participate in a work group. These members can openly submit new features or functionalities to the corporation's "draft specifications" through their technical proposals which are submitted and discussed during the work groups. Once the work group has completed a "draft specification", the work group's chairman sends that "draft specification" to the corporation's board of directors for their review and vote of approval. Upon any such board approval, the "final specification" is made available to all ualink members and is considered part of the ualink specifications.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 99% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

MIXED - 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: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 80
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 69.5%; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.55; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.41; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 140.6% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 56.1% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $320K reported
  • Consistency: 11 of 12 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2024 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 15/100.