Heart and Stroke Research Fund

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
262498876
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Scottsdale, AZ, USA
Phone
4807475029
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Heart, Circulatory Research

Reported finances

Revenue
$112,297
Expenses
$83,644
Assets
$75,359
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • John Gardner (President)
  • Shannon Davidson (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • John Gardner (President): $2,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Provides grants to hospitals and clinics in impoverished third world countries to support ongoing heart, stroke and other degenerative diseases, prevention research projects. Ships medical supplies and equipment to hospitals and clinics in impoverished third world countries. Educate the public about heart, stroke and other degenerative diseases detection and treatments.

What it reported doing in 2024

The Organization provided for shipments of 16,812 lbs. of nutrious life saving foods with an estimated value of 54,639 to Alianza de Nutricion y Salud Alliance of Nutrition Health in Mexicala, B.C. Mexico. That Organization provides for needy children and families by distributing food and clothing to many children and their families weekly. It assisst impoverished families that have desperate needs and those shipments provide nutritional, life saving foods. The Organization also provided for rescued produce and fruits, these gifts in kind were distributed through distribution centers in Arizona to disadvantaged families.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 87% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 67
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 62
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 69.6%; rating input score 70
  • Program expense ratio: 93.5%; rating input score 93
  • Fundraising efficiency: $173.3 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Limited
    • Conducts field audits: Limited
    • May suspend future funding: Limited
    • Requires financial reports: Limited
    • Conducts site visits: Limited
    • Requires grant agreements: Limited
    • May require repayment: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 88.5%; rating input score 88; 51st 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: 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 25.5%; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.9; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.4%; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -22.9% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -18.9% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -10.8% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 69.6% of revenue deployed · 93.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $78K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $2K · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 23 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • 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.

  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 38/100.
  • 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.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 35/100.