Eb Research Partnership Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
272417202
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
6468440902
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Specifically Named Diseases

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$8,244,493
Expenses
$6,577,859
Assets
$23,641,356
Liabilities
$5,899,467

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

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MICHAEL PATRICK HUND (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • MICHAEL PATRICK HUND (CEO): $483,555 total reported compensation
  • ALLISON BOLSHAGETTIGAN (DIRECTOR OF PROGRAMS): $154,045 total reported compensation
  • KATRINA PARKE (CHIEF OF STAFF): $143,290 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Eb research partnership is the largest organizaion dedicated to funding research for treatments and a cure for epidermolysis bullosa, a group of devastating and life threatening genetic skin disorders that affect children from birth.

What it reported doing in 2025

Grants and money awarded for further research. Eb research partnership funds the most promising, innovative and potentially commercially viable treatments and potential cures for eb. Our research grants incorporate advances through the field of biomedicine for better treatments for all eb subtypes. Our scientific advisory board reviews all grant applications so that we are assured that grants are relevant, innovative and could meaningfully improve the quality of life for those living with eb.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 87% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 74% 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 fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 64
  • Transparency & Controls: 76
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 63
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 63.1%; rating input score 63
  • Program expense ratio: 76.9%; rating input score 77
  • Fundraising efficiency: $7.56 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 88.2%; rating input score 88; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Pass
    • 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: 98.6%; rating input score 99; 41st 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: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 20.2%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.59; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.25; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 11.9%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 12.4% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.5% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 15.2% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 63.1% of revenue deployed · 76.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $5.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $484K · 15 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 4 contractors listed · $762K reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 35 current checks pass · 3 findings to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 20 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 17 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 — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 26/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 28/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 31/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.