4P-Support Group

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
912005528
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2019–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2012
Location
Livingston, TX, USA
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Reported finances

Revenue
$44,191
Expenses
$27,007
Assets
$292,428
Liabilities
$2,363

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Sylvia Renfro (President)
  • Varsha Daryanani (Vice President)
  • Susan Bear (Past President)

People named in this filing

  • Sylvia Renfro (President)
  • Varsha Daryanani (Vice President)
  • Stephanie Benson (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-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Our mission is to serve our membership by providing information education and support; uniting families researchers and professionals; and promoting awareness and understanding of 4p- syndrome with Wolf-Hirschhorn Syndrome as the main condition and the related 4th chromosome abnormalities.

What it reported doing in 2025

In 2025 we continued research initiatives geared toward helping guide medical recommendations and provide family support for individuals with 4p- Syndrome as they age into and through adulthood. Results of this research will be presented at the 2026 National conference.

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

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and liabilities are high compared with assets.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 57
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 77
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 47.5%; rating input score 48
  • Program expense ratio: 72.7%; rating input score 73

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 38.9%; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 10.83; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 32.7% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 11.1% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.3% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 47.5% of revenue deployed · 72.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $20K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2019 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 48/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 26/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.