Neuroscience Nursing Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
363915496
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2014–2015
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2015
Location
Saint Paul, MN, USA
Phone
6127230823
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Nursing Services (General)

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$0
Expenses
$873
Assets
$1,134

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • TESS L SIERZANT (President)
  • JANICE M BUELOW (Vice President)
  • PAULA REISS SHERWOOD (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • TESS L SIERZANT (President)
  • JANICE M BUELOW (Vice President)
  • BONITA GORDON (Trustee)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The Neuroscience Nursing Foundation exists to advance the science and practice of neuroscience nursing by identifying and promoting research and evidence-based practices that optimize patient-centered outcomes for people with neurological conditions.

What it reported doing in 2015

2015 has been a year of reorganization for the foundation. The executive director resigned in 2014. The president has been serving as the interim ED. No program grants have been solicited. The office and records were relocated to Minnesota. Focus has been on maintaining the integrity and infrastructure of the organization.

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
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

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 6
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 23
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: 15.9%; rating input score 16

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: Limited
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.3; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -198.5% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -200% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -55.6% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 15.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $139 in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2014 to 2015
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 16/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 55/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.