University of Idaho Laboratory of Applied Science & Research Inc Lasr

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
274189907
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2012–2014
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2014
Location
Post Falls, ID, USA
Phone
2087774700
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Interdisciplinary Research

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2
Expenses
$1,891
Assets
$5,926

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

People named in this filing

  • BRUCE CYR (Chairman)
  • MIKE WILSON (Treasurer)
  • BOB MAGONIGLE (Director)

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

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Foster coopoerative research endeavors with public and private entprises including institutions of learning, private businesses, individuals, and government agencies, leading ot the dissemination and application of knowledgem, discoveries, inventions, and technology for the greatest public good.

What it reported doing in 2014

Research results using and/or applying knowledge acquired, generated and disseminated exclusively to for education, research, and public service purposes. It is impossible to estimate the vast reach of the research available to the public and students.

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
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. Expenses are high relative to revenue and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 92
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 29
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 79.1%; rating input score 79

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -94,450%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.13; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -62.4% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -87.1% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -17.8% per year; rating input score 0; 16th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 79.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2012 to 2014
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.