Urological Research Network Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
863560723
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Hialeah, FL, USA
Phone
3058227227
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Medical Disciplines Research

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$361,284
Expenses
$323,907
Assets
$631,298
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ISABEL LOPEZ (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • MARIA D BIANCO BATLES (DIRECTOR)
  • ALESSI BIANCO (SECRETARY)
  • FERNANDO BIANCO (TREASURER)

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

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The urological network foundation is a scientific organization that aims to support patient's awareness, education through independent support outcomes-based research in the public interest evaluating both medications and medical devices used for urological conditions. Since 40% of urological conditions are associated with a cancer diagnosis, we aim to support research, training and educational programs that improve the prevention, detection, and targeted treatment of genitourinary malignancies and/or programs that seek to cure it for good.

What it reported doing in 2025

The foundation supported and collaborated in clinical research activities aimed at advancing innovative treatments for prostate cancer. During the reporting period, the foundation contributed to the study entitled "natural history of patients undergoing transperineal fusion biopsies to transperineal fusion cryoablation: 5-year outcomes," which was subsequently published in a peer-reviewed medical journal. The study evaluated long-term clinical outcomes associated with transperineal fusion-guided biopsy and cryoablation procedures, contributing valuable scientific data to improve patient care, treatment effectiveness, and evidence-based medical practices.si la fundacin aport financiamiento, datos, reclutamiento de pacientes o apoyo logstico, se puede adaptar la redaccin para reflejar especficamente ese rol. Por ejemplo: the foundation provided support for research, data collection, and clinical collaboration related to the published study entitled "natural history of patients undergoing transperineal fusion biopsies to transperineal fusion cryoablation: 5-year outcomes," contributing to the advancement of medical knowledge and improved treatment options for patients with prostate cancer.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 62% 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 - 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 6
  • Sustainability: 61
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 93.6%; rating input score 94
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 10.3%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.95; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 13.9% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 17.7% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 22% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 93.6% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 4 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $324K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 13 of 13 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2022 to 2025
  • 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.

  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 57/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 58/100.