Consortium for Top-down Proteomics

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
833404154
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2021–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
Cambridge, MA, USA
Phone
6173363280
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Voluntary Health Associations & Medical Disciplines N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue
$51,007
Expenses
$46,143
Assets
$6,036
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Paul Danis (CEO, Director)
  • Neil Kelleher (President, Director)

People named in this filing

  • Paul Danis (CEO, Director)
  • Neil Kelleher (President, Director)
  • Lloyd Smith (Treasurer, Director)

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

Our Mission is to promote collaboration, education, and innovative research that will accelerate the comprehensive analysis of all human proteoforms. This progress will speed developments in the fields of diagnostics, therapeutics, environment, and energy through the detailed, accurate knowledge of proteoforms and their complexes.

What it reported doing in 2025

We planned and executed the 3rd International Symposium on Top-Down Proteomics in Hamburg, Germany August 26-28, 2025. The Symposium was attended by over 200 scientific leaders who are developing innovative technologies and methods that are transforming our understanding of human biology, ushering in the era of proteoform systems biology & medicine, and paving the way for the Human Proteoform Project.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. 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: 50
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 40
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 47.8%; rating input score 48
  • Program expense ratio: 52.9%; rating input score 53

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 9.5%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.13; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 86.7%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 21.8% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.1% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.3% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 47.8% of revenue deployed · 52.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $24K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2021 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 48/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 53/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 15/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 0/100.