Urology Health Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
270044726
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Vestavia Hills, AL, USA
Phone
2059300920
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Professional Societies, Associations

Reported finances

Revenue
$205,008
Expenses
$185,101
Assets
$201,851
Liabilities
$94

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Thomas Moody (President)
  • Thomas Holley (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Thomas Moody (President)
  • Thomas Holley (Vice President)
  • Andrew Strang (Member)

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 Urology Health Foundation is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization founded in 2003 by Birmingham urologist Dr. Thomas E. Moody. Its purposes are to educate physicians and other medical professionals in new techniques and procedures being used in the field of urology and to provide general patient education and screening for urological diseases free of charge.For the past 19 years, a large part of its work has been devoted to promoting public awareness about prostate cancer and to providing free prostate cancer screenings across the State of Alabama, especially in underserved areas that are at highest risk.

What it reported doing in 2025

Due to grants received from the State of Alabama, along with public support, health care professionals have been able to provide free prostate cancer screenings to individuals that otherwise would not have this testing and whole lives may have been saved because of early diagnosis.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 53
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 90.3%; rating input score 90
  • 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: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • 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: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 9.7%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.09; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.9% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.3% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.6% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 90.3% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $185K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 22 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2014 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 56/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 43/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 52/100.