American Society of Hypertension Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN: 133300513
IRS 990 coverage: 2009–2017
Forms available: Form 990 2017
Location: New York, NY, USA
Phone: 2126969099
Rating: 61
Verdict: SUPPORTED
Rating confidence: Moderate
Sector: Heart and Circulatory System Diseases, Disorders

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue: $111,435
Expenses: $996,231
Assets: $0
Liabilities: $0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

DOMENIC A SICA MD (PAST PRESIDENT)
JAN BASILE MD (PRESIDENT ELECT)
JOHN D BISOGNANO MD PHD (PRESIDENT)
MICHAEL J BLOCH MD (VICE PRESIDENT)
RAYMOND TOWNSEND MD (VICE PRESIDENT THROUGH MAY)
TORRY MARK SANSONE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

TORRY MARK SANSONE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $294,539 total reported compensation
KEREYNE BISHOP (DIRECTOR OF FINANCE): $134,148 total reported compensation
JOHN D BISOGNANO MD PHD (PRESIDENT): $18,750 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of the american society of hypertension, inc. (ash) is to promote strategies to prevent hypertension and to improve the care of patients with hypertension and associate disorders. The organization is in the process of dissolution and winding down.

What it reported doing in 2017

During fiscal year 2018 the organization didn't have annual meeting and it was in a process of dissolution. Amounts spent for programs relate to distributions of assets and various winding down expenses.

Operating model

Revenue model: Donor-supported. 87% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model: Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 77% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

Financial Efficiency: 75
Transparency & Controls: 56
Accountability: 72
Sustainability: 1
Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
Program expense ratio: 57.2%; rating input score 57
Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

Consistency checks: 81.2%; rating input score 81; 1st percentile among comparable filings
Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Pass
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
Foreign activity oversight: Limited
Grant itemization coverage: 29.6%; rating input score 30; 36th percentile among comparable filings
Major donor itemization: No; rating input score 0
Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

Independent voting board: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 25th percentile among comparable filings
Governance controls: 4 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 44
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

Operating margin: -794%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
Officer compensation ratio: 44.9%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

Program expense growth: -20.8% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
Revenue growth: -19.7% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
Asset growth: -22.9% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Details

Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 57.2% of spending went to programs
Governance: 12 of 13 board members independent · 4 of 9 filing controls reported
Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $569K in reported program spending
Leadership: top reported pay $295K · 15 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
Consistency: 26 of 28 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
Filing history: 9 filing years from 2009 to 2017
Contacts: How to reach this organization
Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
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.

Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 57/100.
Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 30/100.
Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 8 not reported.
High — Transparency & Controls: Major donor itemization scored 0/100.
High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 0/100.
High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 4/100.
Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.