Unamesa Association

What it reported doing in 2024

2. Precision Health Equity Initiative Based on learnings from UnaMesa projects over that past decade and motivated by increasing disparities in care related to both the pandemic and a growing crisis in the availability of highly qualified healthcare professionals, in 2023 UnaMesa supported the launch of a new initiative directed at accelerating the development and adoption of digital health innovations that directly address disparities in care. We have identified a critical, unmet need for connecting at-risk communities and individuals into the process for developing effective, technology enabled care pathways that address the unique challenges faced by these individuals and communities. In 2024 the Precision Health Equity Initiative (PHEI) continued development of the Risk Informed SCreening (RISC) study, a clinical registry study that gained IRB (Institutional Review Board) approval to gather rigorous data on how personalized, risk based screening plans for breast cancer affect clinician and patient choices. Women of color are twice as likely to die from breast cancer as the national average. The RISC study is specifically designed to address such disparities by engaging with underserved populations, providing individual risk assessments and personalized screening plans, and identifying how new technologies can make a practical difference in early detection and early intervention to reduce morbidity and mortality. These innovations including multifactor, validated risk assessments, better patient experiences, and increased support for those at highest risk are key steps towards eliminating disparities in care. In 2024 PHEI expanded the design of the RISC study to include heart disease and metabolic disease as part of the personalized screening study. This expansion built on developments in AI models for screening mammograms that can detect Breast Arterial Calcifications which may be indicative of potential heart disease. By including these and other AI algorithms into the study design, the RISC study can gather real world evidence of how information from these algorithms influences the recommendations of clinicians and the understanding, decisions and actions of individuals to reduce their risk of disease and improve their health. In addition, PHEI developed an economic model for supporting these personalized services whereby individual receiving a personalized service can donate to PHEI to subsidize the same service for others who may not have the ability to pay. This buy one, give one model coupled with extremely high quality and care and excellent patient experience offers a new approach for reducing health disparities and making actionable, effective screening available to everyone across economic strata. PHEI also continued to build out a network of clinicians, innovators, patient advocacy groups and other stakeholders to carry out the RISC study and work together collaboratively to advance the PHEI mission. This includes a scientific advisory board to develop and oversee the RISC study and related efforts along with participating clinical sites that provide patient services and enroll participants in the RISC study. PHEI also worked to find donors, sponsors, and partners to help cover the costs of operating the RISC study. Bringing in funding to support operation of the RISC study remains an open challenge. PHEI will continue to pursue additional funding and partnerships in order to begin enrolling patients in the RISC study in the upcoming year.

Financial Efficiency

• Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
• Program expense ratio: 89.9%; rating input score 90
• 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: Yes; rating input score 100
• Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

• Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
• Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
  • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
  • Whistleblower policy: Fail
  • Document-retention policy: Fail
  • 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: Missing
  • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

• Operating margin: -13.3%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
• Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
• Liabilities to assets ratio: 3.52; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
• Officer compensation ratio: 3.5%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

• Program expense growth: -2.5% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
• Revenue growth: -2% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
• Asset growth: 0.4% per year; rating input score 100; 19th percentile among comparable filings