Hudson David Mcneel Memorial Fund

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
277067886
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2016–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2015
Location
Issaquah, WA, USA
Phone
2067148378
Rating
44
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$35,922
Expenses
$25,328
Assets
$71,913
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

2 people listed

People named in this filing

  • HEATHER MCNEEL (TRUSTEE)
  • WARREN MCNEEL (TRUSTEE)

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

To raise awareness and funds that will help support premature lives and assist families navigating through the nicu journey.

What it reported doing in 2025

To raise awareness and funds that will help support premature lives and assist families navigating through the nicu journey. Support is provided to the university of Washington medical center's neonatal intensive care unit, and funds are used for continuing education, fellowship programs, unit expansion, increased technology and infant transport programs. Foundation expenses are paid through separate donations with an individual, and 100% of all other contributions are used to support the university of Washington medical center's neonatal intensive care unit.grants were $20,325 in 2025 alone.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. 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: 16
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 73
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 13.9%; rating input score 14
  • Program expense ratio: 19.8%; rating input score 20

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 29.5%; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.84; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -29.6% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -10.6% per year; rating input score 0; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0.6% per year; rating input score 0; 35th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 13.9% of revenue deployed · 19.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $5K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 2 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2016 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 14/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 20/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.