National Pku Alliance Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
262849140
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2008
Location
Roanoke, VA, USA
Phone
8556758211
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Down Syndrome Research

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,674,435
Expenses
$2,032,838
Assets
$6,181,230
Liabilities
$350,810

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CATHERINE WARREN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • RHONDA CONNOLLY (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • CATHERINE WARREN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $210,314 total reported compensation
  • SUSAN GRAY (DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT): $159,006 total reported compensation
  • SARAH GALLAGHER (DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT): $129,051 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Our mission is to improve the lives of individuals with pku, pursue a cure by expanding research and provide education and support to individuals living with pku and their caregivers.

What it reported doing in 2025

Community engagement continues to be a core pillar of the national pku alliance. The community engagement director is responsible for planning and managing programs for the pku community, including a mentoring program, community calls, support kits, maternal pku patient support, advocacy efforts and an affiliate program.the director schedules, manages and attends virtual calls with the community across different pku age groups and pku caregiver types. 48 calls were held in 2025 with 250 attendees.in 2025, the npkua mentor program grew to support over 45 caregivers and individuals with pku through personalized one-on-one mentoring, with mentors connecting virtually and in person to share experiences and develop skills to better assist their mentees.the npkua advocacy committee works alongside members of the broader rare disease community to advance efforts around nutrition, equity and other priorities of the pku community. The committee developed an advocacy media toolkit to help community members share their stories. Staff and advocacy committee volunteers have also responded to the termination of the achdnc (advisory committee on heritable disorders in newborns and children) by calling on constituents, through database-wide email and social media outreach, to sign-on to contact their legislators and share their story and support of nbs. Started a newborn screening video series to be used in september, recognized as newborn screening awareness month. The series raises awareness about the importance of newborn screening, and the critical role of newborn screening in identifying serious conditions that can lead to severe disability or death if left undiagnosed. In total, npkua supported 10 state and federal legislative advocacy efforts.in 2025 npkua provided $34,057 to npkua affiliates to support community events and camps in their regions. During the year, npkua also met one-on-one with individual affiliate leaders to better understand their goals and needs. In 2025, 206 newborn and kindergarten kits were delivered to families welcoming a new baby with pku or supporting a new kindergartener with pku.in 2025, 55 packages of diet-appropriate food were delivered to maternal pku patients to best support their low-protein diet.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 91% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 71% for direct work, and 29% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 65
  • Transparency & Controls: 73
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 65
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 63.1%; rating input score 63
  • Program expense ratio: 76.9%; rating input score 77
  • Fundraising efficiency: $9.8 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Pass
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Pass
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 49th 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: 24%; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.04; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 24.5%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.8% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.4% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.7% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 63.1% of revenue deployed · 76.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 6 filed program accomplishments · $1.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $210K · 16 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 39 of 39 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 11 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 8 filed related-organization links
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 5 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 35/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 11/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 58/100.