Uwm Research Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
208297675
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Milwaukee, WI, USA
Phone
4149064645
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Research Institutes and Public Policy Analysis

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,486,615
Expenses
$1,390,815
Assets
$4,227,993
Liabilities
$154,551

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JESSICA SILVAGGI (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • DAVID GILBERT (EX-OFFICIO DIRECTOR (THRU MAY 25)): $378,636 total reported compensation
  • JESSICA SILVAGGI (PRESIDENT): $250,610 total reported compensation
  • BRIAN WALSH (SR. TECH MANAGER): $139,707 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Support research and innovation at the university of Wisconsin - milwaukee by providing reserach funding, entrepreneurship support, and by engaging in corporate partnering activities to that end.

What it reported doing in 2024

Wedc epg grant provides funding support and technical assistance to startup companies. Twelve grants total. Wedc bridge grant program invests in new companies of uwm faculty, staff, and students that have licensed intellectual property (patents). Five grants total

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 73% for direct work, and 27% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 66
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 58
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 91.2%; rating input score 91
  • Program expense ratio: 94.7%; rating input score 95
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 2nd 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: 89.4%; rating input score 89; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 6.4%; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.04; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9.9%; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.2% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.7% per year; rating input score 100; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.5% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 91.2% of revenue deployed · 94.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $379K · 13 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $328K reported
  • Consistency: 27 of 29 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 11 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 54/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 37/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 56/100.