Bryon Riesch Paralysis Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
392016568
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2009
Location
Waukesha, WI, USA
Phone
2625472083
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and/or Fund Distribution

Reported finances

Revenue
$473,232
Expenses
$1,047,960
Assets
$322,814
Liabilities
$18,145

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BRYON RIESCH (PRESIDENT)
  • DON LEVINGS (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • BRYON RIESCH (PRESIDENT)
  • DON LEVINGS (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • CINDY BASSETT (SECRETARY)

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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The bryon riesch paralysis foundation's goal is to find a cure for paralysis through funding the latest in medical research and to provide assistance to those that suffer from neurological disorders.

What it reported doing in 2024

At the bryon riesch paralysis foundation (brpf), we believe that a cure for paralysis is truly possible. That is why we award research grants every year to some of the brightest minds and best research facilities in the united states.a cure will most likely not come from one idea or one source but result from a collaboration of efforts. Consequently, we provide pilot funding for ideas that otherwise may not be explored. With strong relationships with the medical college of Wisconsin, we work hard at making sure our funds get to those researchers and ideas most deserving. Help from generous supporters can guarantee that we keep researchers focused on a cure for paralysis.also, at the brpf, we find it very important to help those individuals already suffering from the devastating effects of a spinal cord injury. The financial costs associated with spinal cord injuries are extreme and many times as crippling as the injury itself. In an effort to provide some assistance, we have established charitable grants which are awarded quarterly to individuals. These grants help pay for items such as van modifications, wheelchairs and ramps.many people suffering from neurological disorders also desire desperately to go back to school. Consequently, we award scholarships both for the spring and fall semesters to individuals that are either suffering from a neurological disorder or have parents that suffer from a neurological disorder. We are elated to see people overcome very tough situations to be productive and important members of our society.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 98% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% 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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 17
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 89.9%; rating input score 90
  • Fundraising efficiency: $7.24 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 98.6%; rating input score 99; 59th 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: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -121.4%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.31; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 10.9% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.6% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.8% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 89.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $942K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 14 people listed
  • Consistency: 27 of 28 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 6 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 31/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 16/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 31/100.