Venture Strategies Innovations

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
262813021
IRS 990-PF coverage
2010–2015
Forms available
Form 990-PF 2015
Location
Irvine, CA, USA
Phone
9496225515
Rating
44
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Reproductive Health Care Facilities and Allied Services

Reported finances

Revenue
$-12,198
Expenses
$1,067,457

Source: IRS Form 990-PF. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.

Overview

Mission

Reproductive Health Care Facilities and Allied Services

What it reported funding in 2015

The foundation reported 4 grants totaling $200,924. The stated grant purposes included to support the transfer of vsi resources and materials to a newly designed vsi web archive to be publised on the bixby website., to fund the writing and publishing of research findings from project in rwanda., and board directed distribution of 50% of remaining assets of vsi upon dissolution of the organization..

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 100% of the foundation's positive operating resources came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The foundation combined direct charitable work with grants to other organizations or people.
  • Includes asset-sale income: Asset-sale income is shown separately from recurring resources when classifying the revenue model.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and the filing identifies who received its grants. A relatively small share of spending goes to grants and assets provide a limited cushion relative to annual grants.

Rating breakdown

  • Grant Deployment: NotEnoughData
  • Cost Efficiency: 19
  • Transparency: 100
  • Compliance: 100
  • Endowment Health: 4

Detailed rating inputs

Grant Deployment

  • Grant deployment ratio: Limited

Cost Efficiency

  • Grant expense ratio: 19%; rating input score 19; 35th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency

  • Grant recipient disclosure: Yes; rating input score 100

Compliance

  • Part VII-B activity disclosures: 19 of 19 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Property sale or exchange with a disqualified person: Pass
    • Borrowing from or lending to a disqualified person: Pass
    • Goods, services, or facilities involving a disqualified person: Pass
    • Compensation paid to a disqualified person: Pass
    • Assets transferred to a disqualified person: Pass
    • Payment to a government official: Pass
    • Uncorrected prior self-dealing: Pass
    • Prior-year undistributed income: Pass
    • Excess business holdings: Pass
    • Investments that may jeopardize charitable purposes: Pass
    • Uncorrected prior-year jeopardizing investments: Pass
    • Attempt to influence legislation: Pass
    • Attempt to influence an election: Pass
    • Grants to individuals: Pass
    • Grants to organizations: Pass
    • Spending for a noncharitable purpose: Pass
    • Funds received for a personal-benefit contract: Pass
    • Premiums paid on a personal-benefit contract: Pass
    • Prohibited tax-shelter transaction: Pass
  • Filing consistency checks: 8; rating input score 100

Endowment Health

  • Endowment-health comparison: 0; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Grants: 100% of grant recipient detail disclosed
  • Trustees: Filed trustees detail
  • Self-dealing: 100% of reviewed questions answered “No”
  • Investments: 4th percentile for endowment coverage
  • Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2010 to 2015
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 9 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Cost Efficiency: Grant expense ratio scored 19/100.
  • High — Endowment Health: Endowment-health comparison scored 4/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is recorded as not currently operating in California.