International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
852547058
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2020
Location
Milwaukee, WI, USA
Phone
4149189816
Rating
59
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Professional Societies, Associations

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,305,916
Expenses
$522,871
Assets
$10,268,568
Liabilities
$78,420

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JONATHAN COLE (PRESIDENT)
  • WALTER PAULUS (PAST PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • ROBERT CHEN (DIRECTOR): $40,000 total reported compensation
  • MARGITTA SEECK (DIRECTOR): $5,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Ifcn's mission is to promote best practice in clinical neurophysiology through education and research throughout the world.

What it reported doing in 2024

Journals - clinical neurophysiology is the official journal of ifcn. It is dedicated to publishing scholoarly reports on the pathophysiology underlying diseases of the peripheral and central nervous systems of humans. Clinical neurophysiology practice focuses on clinical research, case reports or clinical series, normal values and didactic reviews. It complements clinical neurophysiology which focuses on innovative research in the speciality. It has a role in supporting established clinical practice and an educational role for trainees, technicians, and practitioners.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 65% for direct work, and 35% for grants.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 37
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 86
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 22.7%; rating input score 23
  • Program expense ratio: 72.4%; rating input score 72
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Limited
    • 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 60%; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 19.64; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8.6%; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -81.6% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -35.4% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 14% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 22.7% of revenue deployed · 72.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 11 board members independent · 7 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $378K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $40K · 11 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $105K reported
  • Consistency: 25 of 27 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes foreign activity
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 23/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 41/100.