As Healthy as Possible

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
921715452
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Winston Salem, NC, USA
Phone
9802028195
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Alliance/Advocacy Organizations

Reported finances

Revenue
$6,025
Expenses
$1,548
Assets
$13,488
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

People named in this filing

  • Daniel O'Donnell (Executive Board Member)
  • Johanna O'Donnell (Executive Board Member)
  • Trine Hestbaek (Executive Board Member)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Our mission is to have a positive impact on the lives of those with a POLR2A mutation and to help them, their families, and their caregivers stay as healthy as possible.

What it reported doing in 2025

We are ambitious about being able to reach out to those affected by mutations of POLR2A gene, help them find the information they need, and to advocate for resources on their behalf. In 2024 our organization became a NORD platinum member, and our organization has been able to attend the NORD conference in 2024 and 2025 to establish a network or resources. NORD Membership fees of $50.00 contribute to this accomplishment. Also in 2025 our organization provided a grant to help with funeral expenses for a patient with a POLR2A diagnosis. Additional revenue from this area has the potential to be applied to future support of other items such as the natural history study, medical equipment, or travel expenses for other families.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 65% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 48
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 78
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 25.7%; rating input score 26
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 74.3%; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 8.71; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1.3% per year; rating input score 0; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.3% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 52.3% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 25.7% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $2K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 37 of 38 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2023 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 26/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.