Kennedy Ladd Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
811387597
IRS 990 coverage
2025–2025
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2021
Location
Kingston, TN, US
Rating
60
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Specifically Named Diseases

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$172,102
Expenses
$199,013
Assets
$112,114
Liabilities
$1,652

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Allie Frances Ladd (Director): $75,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To raise awareness, educate about MPS and Orphan Diseases, and raise funding for a cure.

What it reported doing in 2025

In the past year, The Kennedy Ladd Foundation has continued to grow into a powerful force of hope for families affected by MPS1. We served over 100 families, brought 25 MPS1 families from across the country to East Tennessee for a fully supported, multi-day experience, and provided 30 iPad packages to children in need. Through storytelling, advocacy, and community-driven events reaching 1000+ attendees, we raised critical awareness and funding while continuing to push forward in the fight for better treatments and ultimately, a cure.

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 100% 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. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 74
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 0
  • Sustainability: 20
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 85.8%; rating input score 86
  • Program expense ratio: 74.2%; rating input score 74
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4.02 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -15.6%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.56; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 37.7%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 22.9% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -19.3% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 3 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 85.8% of revenue deployed · 74.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 7 board members independent · 0 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $148K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $75K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 7 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 17/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 14/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 27/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 37/100.