Lam Treatment Alliance Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
204329754
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2013
Forms available
Form 990 2013
Location
Sacramento, CA, USA
Phone
9167055283
Rating
63
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Lung Disease

Reported finances

Revenue
$46,592
Expenses
$262,232
Assets
$154,480
Liabilities
$376,500

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • RICHARD ABRUSCI (President)

People named in this filing

  • STEVEN M NIEMI DVM DACLAM (BOARD CHAIR)
  • JOHN RACHLIN JD MPH (BOARD MEMBER)
  • ANNE LEVINE (BOARD MEMBER)

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 2013. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The lam treatment alliance is a non-profit organization dedicated to catalyzing and funding research and fostering patient and patient-researcher partnerships in order to find a treatment for lam (lymphangioleiomyomatosis)in the fastest time possible.

What it reported doing in 2013

To carry out its purpose, the lam treatment alliance runs programs dedicated to a) mobilizing expertise (ad hoc meetings year round; monthly seminar series; international state of the science summits; recruitment of researches); b) connecting researchers and patients (strategizing for multi-disciplinary clinical care; patient support; global patient data and trial network); c) eliminating barriers to moving science forward (ensuring fast and effective tissue procurement, banking, distribution; cell isolation, culturing, cell line; animal model development) and d) fast-tracking core research (accessing leading edge expertise and technologies and funding scientific collaborations for greatest impact)

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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: 77
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 6
  • Sustainability: 16
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 58.7%; rating input score 59
  • Fundraising efficiency: $0.84 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -462.8%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.59; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 2.44; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 58.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 7 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $154K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 23 of 23 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 59/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 14/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 6/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 19/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.
  • High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is not authorized to operate as a charity in California.