International Federation of Societies for Surgery of the Hand

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
660457384
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Chicago, IL, USA
Phone
3129291964
Rating
55
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$238,208
Expenses
$201,626
Assets
$2,761,937
Liabilities
$168,058

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • S RAJA SABAPATHY (PRESIDENT)
  • DAVID WARWICK (PRESIDENT EL)

People named in this filing

  • S RAJA SABAPATHY (PRESIDENT)
  • DAVID WARWICK (PRESIDENT EL)
  • DANIEL NAGLE (IMMEDIATE PA)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

To coordinate the activities of the various societies for surgery of the hand throughout the world, and in this way increase and spread knowledge of surgery of the hand.

What it reported doing in 2025

The federation supports the development and advancement of the science of hand surgery worldwide by making grants to organizations and individuals with a major interest in hand surgery to fund educational opportunities and activities likely to improve the quality of hand surgery throughout the world. In 2025, the ifssh-aahs-assh travelling fellowship program was undertaken (associated finance reported in the 2024 form 990). Further grants were awarded and paid in 2025 to the asia-pacific federation of societies for surgery of the hand (10,000) to run ifssh-named workshops at their biennial scientific event (march 2026, mumbai) and to progress hand surgery in burundi through specific walant surgical workshops (10,000).

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 72% for direct work, and 28% 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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 26
  • Transparency & Controls: 77
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 69
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 25.7%; rating input score 26
  • Program expense ratio: 35.3%; rating input score 35
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 81st 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 15.4%; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 13.7; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1.1% per year; rating input score 0; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.1% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.3% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 25.7% of revenue deployed · 35.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $71K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2015 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 26/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 35/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 26/100.