Center for Disease Analysis Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
810946224
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-PF 2016
Location
Lafayette, CO, USA
Phone
7208904848
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Medical Disciplines Research

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,556,555
Expenses
$3,593,709
Assets
$9,668,861
Liabilities
$5,472,137

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • HOMAUNE RAZAVI (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • DEVIN RAZAVI-SHEARER (POLARIS OBS): $157,331 total reported compensation
  • CAROLYN WALLACE (MASLD/MASH D): $118,823 total reported compensation
  • HOMAUNE RAZAVI (PRESIDENT): $73,435 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To end preventable suffering and premature death from treatable diseases through innovation, decision support, equitable healthcare, and global collaborationso every person can live with health, dignity, and hope.

What it reported doing in 2025

The polaris observatory played a crucial role in guiding regional, national, and global planning and decision-making regarding hepatitis b and c. It provided comprehensive disease burden estimates, data, and forecasting tools to support these efforts. The cda foundation utilized targeted grants to empower partners in testing and scaling innovative high-impact models for case-finding, retesting, linkage, and re-engagement. By collaborating directly with global health organizations, ministries of health, non-governmental organizations, universities, and health systems, the cda foundation contributed to the development of equitable healthcare strategies. Furthermore, the foundation conducted research that combines practical epidemiology research and modeling to estimate disease burden. The findings were published to raise awareness about the disease and drive action towards its prevention and control.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 75% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 64% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 72
  • Accountability: 80
  • Sustainability: 60
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 76.4%; rating input score 76
  • Program expense ratio: 94.1%; rating input score 94
  • Fundraising efficiency: $223.63 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • 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: 98.5%; rating input score 98; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 21.1%; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.69; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.57; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9.7%; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 14.1% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 15.5% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 27.3% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 76.4% of revenue deployed · 94.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 6 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $3.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $157K · 8 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 27 of 28 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2017 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 29 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 26 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 14/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 34/100.