A Foundation Building Strength Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 261761329
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2011–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Palo Alto, CA, USA
- Phone
- 4082120207
- Rating
- 81
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Fund Raising and/or Fund Distribution
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,048,763
- Expenses
- $1,163,106
- Assets
- $3,358,607
- Liabilities
- $128,832
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
10 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Jennifer Tozer (Executive Director)
- Marc Guillet (President)
Highest reported compensation
- Jennifer Tozer (Executive Director): $115,000 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To find treatments for Nemaline Myopathy
What it reported doing in 2024
The largest program services include research grants to foreign and domestic organizations advancing Nemaline Myopathy science. Domestically, grants supported the development of gene therapy for ACTA1-based Nemaline Myopathy; gene replacement and drug screening studies for KLHL40-, KLHL41-related forms; creation of patient-derived 3D muscle models to test potential treatments; maintenance of a national biobank to advance research and clinical trial readiness; and development of soft robotic garments to assist lower-limb movement and improve mobility for children with NM. Internationally, grants supported research to test therapies for KBTBD13-related Nemaline Myopathy (NEM6) using a mouse model to determine treatment timing and efficacy in preventing or reversing disease progression.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 90% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 79% of its reported program spending out as grants.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 90
- Transparency & Controls: 70
- Accountability: 84
- Sustainability: 40
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 99.4%; rating input score 99
- Program expense ratio: 89.6%; rating input score 90
- Fundraising efficiency: $12.48 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 24th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Claims monitoring procedures: Fail
- Requires narrative reports: Fail
- Conducts field audits: Fail
- May suspend future funding: Fail
- Requires financial reports: Fail
- Conducts site visits: Fail
- Requires grant agreements: Fail
- May require repayment: Fail
- Grant itemization coverage: 91.4%; rating input score 91; 39th 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: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- 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: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -10.9%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.89; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 9.9%; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 14.4% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 13.9% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 16.4% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 99.4% of revenue deployed · 89.6% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $115K · 10 people listed
- Consistency: 26 of 27 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and grants
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 5 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: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 45/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 16/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 37/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 55/100.