Hidradenitis Suppurativa Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
203246772
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2022
Forms available
Form 990 2022, Form 990-EZ 2018, Form 990-N 2014
Location
Cary, NC, USA
Phone
8664412392
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Specifically Named Diseases

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,179,185
Expenses
$1,139,182
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ILTEFAT HAMZAVI MD (IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT)
  • JOSLYN R SCIACCA KIRBY MD (PRESIDENT)
  • HADAR LEV-TOV MD (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • BRENT HAZELETT (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • BRENT HAZELETT (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $225,000 total reported compensation
  • AMIT GARG MD (DIRECTOR): $3,500 total reported compensation
  • ATHENA GIERBOLINI (DIRECTOR): $2,500 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of the hs foundation is to improve the lives of people affected by hs through advocacy, education and research.

What it reported doing in 2022

The hs foundation held its second annual educational event targetedtowards dermatology residents. The purpose of the event, known as hs academy, was to educate the next generation of dermatologists about the latest advancements in diagnosis, pathogenesis, epidemiology and comorbidities, as well as medical and procedure-based treatments for hidradenitis suppurativa through lecture, break-out sessions, and case-based studies with renowned experts and patients. Over 110 residents attended this two-day educational experience.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 88% 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 - 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 total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 77
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 23
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 77.2%; rating input score 77
  • Program expense ratio: 79.8%; rating input score 80
  • Fundraising efficiency: $25.55 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th 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: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 3.4%; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 20.7%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 39.9% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 32.3% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13.6% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 77.2% of revenue deployed · 79.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 16 of 16 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $909K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $225K · 18 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2017 to 2022
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 8 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 46/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 13/100.