Wgu Labs

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
824523369
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2022
Forms available
Form 990 2022
Location
Salt Lake City, UT, USA
Phone
3854289120
Rating
59
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Educational Services and Schools - Other

Reported finances

Revenue
$10,985,368
Expenses
$8,655,856
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JASON LEVIN (DIRECTOR / PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • SCOTT PULSIPHER (DIRECTOR (CHAIR)): $1,976,036 total reported compensation
  • DAVID GROW (DIRECTOR / TREASURER): $753,522 total reported compensation
  • JASON LEVIN (DIRECTOR / PRESIDENT): $463,663 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To engage in research, development and licensing of innovative technologies to optimize learner outcomes; to develop and distribute information about integrated healthcare concepts and systems, sponsor research focused on emerging practices in integrated healthcare, and facilitate and support convenings for those interested in integrated healthcare.

What it reported doing in 2022

Wgu labs worked with 6 early-stage edtech companies solving important problems in education to conduct research and help them grow. Wgu labs continues to expand the college innovation network, a group of post-secondary institutions that serve under-represented students committed to researching innovative solutions to improve outcomes for students. With the support of the charles koch foundation, wgu labs is conducting research on a hybrid college model to increase access and completion of under-represented students.

Operating model

Revenue model
Affiliate-supported. 73% of the money available for current operations came from contributions from related organizations.
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

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 52
  • Transparency & Controls: 74
  • Accountability: 56
  • Sustainability: 40
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 46.8%; rating input score 47
  • Program expense ratio: 61.5%; rating input score 62
  • Fundraising efficiency: $12.7 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Scored; rating input score 0

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 40%; rating input score 40; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 21.2%; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 18.6%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -3% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 29.9% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 14.7% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 46.8% of revenue deployed · 61.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 5 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $5.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $2M · 11 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $126K reported
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2018 to 2022
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 7 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 47/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 40/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 43/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 4/100.