University of Florida College of Nursing Faculty Practice Assoc Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
593513811
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Gainesville, FL, USA
Phone
3522736386
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Education N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,104,926
Expenses
$1,652,712
Assets
$3,173,911
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • DR SHAKIRA HENDERSON (CHAIR): $794,407 total reported compensation
  • KELLY SHARP MBA CPA CMA (DIRECTOR): $318,745 total reported compensation
  • DENISE SCHENTRUP DNP MSN ARNP BC (SECRETARY/TREASURER): $201,730 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Organized exclusively to support the service, teaching and research mission and goals of the university of Florida and its j. Hillis miller health center and the college of nursing.

What it reported doing in 2024

Approximately 16 different college of nursing faculty members provided professional services to patients/clients in settings in which they taught nursing students and enhanced clinical nursing skills and knowledge. The 5 faculty members who practiced and taught students at archer family health care and in the archer community provided approximately 6,100 patient visits and supervised the clinical education of 9 graduate students. The remaining faculty members practiced and taught students in other settings for which patient data is not available to the college of nursing.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 91% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 97% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 37
  • Sustainability: 33
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Limited
    • 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: -49.6%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.92; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 18.1%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.1% per year; rating input score 100; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.3% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2.5% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 6 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $794K · 6 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 14 of 14 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 2 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 3/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 17/100.