Board of Editors in the Life Sciencesinc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
521726784
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2019–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2018
Location
St Paul, MN, USA
Phone
6519255528
Rating
36
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$54,711
Expenses
$70,006
Assets
$58,157
Liabilities
$32,037

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SHERYLE HAZARD (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • STEVE PALMER PHD (PRESIDENT)
  • ERICA GOODOFF (PRESIDENT-ELECT)

People named in this filing

  • SHERYLE HAZARD (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • STEVE PALMER PHD (PRESIDENT)
  • ERICA GOODOFF (PRESIDENT-ELECT)

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

Bels mission is to maintain and promote a standard of proficiency in editing in the life sciences and to improve communication in the life sciences through certification that supports the role and value of editorial professionals.

What it reported doing in 2025

Board of editors in the life sciences fulfilled its mission offering online and proctored exams in the us and abroad with 67 examinees; portfolio reviews.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
No current program activity. The filing reports no program spending for the current year.

The verdict

REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 29
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -28%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.83; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.55; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -150% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.5% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -4.3% per year; rating input score 0; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 1 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2019 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 18/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 43/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 7/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.