Undavia Foundation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 473872367
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2016–2016
- Forms available
- Form 990 2016
- Location
- Stafford, TX, USA
- Phone
- 2813439555
- Rating
- 72
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Chemistry, Chemical Engineering
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $403,529
- Expenses
- $367,446
- Assets
- $36,153
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
3 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JERALD GARDSBANE (PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- JERALD GARDSBANE (PRESIDENT): $62,000 total reported compensation
- HERBERT GLEITZ (DIRECTOR): $11,000 total reported compensation
- CLARISSA TREVINO (DIRECTOR): $10,000 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The mission of the organization
What it reported doing in 2016
Research regarding compounding pharmaceuticals
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 60
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Accountability: 79
- Sustainability: 44
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 65%; rating input score 65
- Program expense ratio: 71.4%; rating input score 71
- 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 9 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- Other executive compensation review process: Limited
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 8.9%; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.1; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 22.6%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 65% of revenue deployed · 71.4% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 4 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $262K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $62K · 3 people listed
- Consistency: 18 of 18 current checks pass
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
- 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.
Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 8 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 6/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 17/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.