University at Buffalo Foundation Incubator Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
161301210
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Buffalo, NY, USA
Phone
7166453013
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$588,111
Expenses
$583,510
Assets
$1,216,093
Liabilities
$132,115

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ANASTACIA S KNAPPER (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)

Highest reported compensation

  • ANASTACIA S KNAPPER (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $463,825 total reported compensation
  • PATRICK RICHEY (CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $302,367 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 organization operates an incubator facility to identify and aid start-up businesses with a purpose of stimulating development and increasing interaction between the university at buffalo and such businesses.

What it reported doing in 2024

The purpose of the facility is to identify and aid start-up business and induce such businesses to occupy the incubator facility with the purpose of increasing employment, stimulating economic development and increasing the interaction between the state university of New York at buffalo and such start-up businesses. The 40,000 square foot facility was designed to be and still is fda compliant, a critical step for companies developing either pharmaceutical products or medical devices. The graduates of the incubator represent a variety of technologies including software, engineering, synthetic intelligence, environmental, education, lasers, photonics, pharmaceuticals and others.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 94% 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

STRONG - 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 44
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 99.2%; rating input score 99
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 22nd 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: 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: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 0.8%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.08; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.11; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 18.3%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.2% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.7% per year; rating input score 100; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3% per year; rating input score 100; 29th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 99.2% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $584K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $464K · 10 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed
  • Consistency: 23 of 24 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 6 filed related-organization links
  • 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.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 38/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 17/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 41/100.