National Rosacea Society
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 364120334
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2020–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025, Form 990-T 2025
- Location
- Chicago, IL, USA
- Phone
- 8473828971
- Rating
- 72
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Specifically Named Diseases
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $439,080
- Expenses
- $367,534
- Assets
- $185,514
- Liabilities
- $34,129
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
7 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- ANDREW F HUFF (PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- ANDREW F HUFF (PRESIDENT): $73,863 total reported compensation
- MARY F ERHARD (SECRETARY): $7,982 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 improve the lives of those who suffer from rosacea by raising awareness, providing information and supporting medical research on this widespread but poorly understood skin disorder affecting an estimated 16 million americans.
What it reported doing in 2025
Medical scientific education - because of rosacea's wide range of potential manifestations, the society conducts consensus conferences of leading experts to develop worldwide standardized criteria for the disease, including its primary and secondary diagnostic features, phenotypes, grades and management options. These standards are reviewed by medical authorities throughout the united states and worldwide, and published in medical journals to serve as a standard instruments for unifying research, improving clinical diagnosis and care, and providing common terminology for communications. The society also participants at major medical meetings, conducts medical conferences, produces medical education materials and distributes information on its research grants program to research centers.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 95% 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. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 68
- Transparency & Controls: 83
- Accountability: 65
- Sustainability: 40
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 71.5%; rating input score 71
- Program expense ratio: 85.3%; rating input score 85
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- 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; 81st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 71.4%; rating input score 71; 21st percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 56
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 16.3%; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.5; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.18; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: Limited
Growth
- Program expense growth: 2.1% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 4.5% per year; rating input score 100; 45th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 12.8% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 71.5% of revenue deployed · 85.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 5 of 7 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $314K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $74K · 7 people listed
- Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $202K reported
- Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
- Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
- Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
- 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.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 5 of 8 not reported.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 25/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 17/100.