Medical Science Liaison Society Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
454885951
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2012
Location
Weston, FL, USA
Phone
9199049988
Rating
59
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Health Support Services

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,214,342
Expenses
$1,164,518
Assets
$75,057
Liabilities
$172,117

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • HELIANA SULA (SECRETARY): $90,960 total reported compensation
  • SAMUEL DYER (CHAIRMAN): $90,400 total reported compensation
  • JEFFRY KRAEMER (DIRECTOR): $9,360 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Msls is exclusively dedicated to advancing the global medical science liaison profession. The msls officially launched the medical science-liaison board certification, its first professional board certification.

What it reported doing in 2024

Msls transitioned its training programs virtually to enhance and streamline its training programs. It also created multiple standards operating procedure for various companies. Msls conducts a series of 20 weekly insight shows that includes discussion of issues impacting the msl profession and medical affairs. These shows cover tips, tools, and techniques to achieve greater success and efficiencies.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 88% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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

MIXED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 69
  • Transparency & Controls: 64
  • Accountability: 30
  • Sustainability: 26
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 75.8%; rating input score 76
  • Program expense ratio: 79%; rating input score 79
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 33.3%; rating input score 33; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Limited
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 4.1%; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.06; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 2.29; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 16.4%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 12.7% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 14.4% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.3% per year; rating input score 100; 31st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 75.8% of revenue deployed · 79% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 1 of 3 board members independent · 2 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $920K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $91K · 3 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 33/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 3/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 48/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 20/100.