Parkinson Research Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
200205035
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Sarasota, FL, USA
Phone
9418704438
Rating
61
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Specifically Named Diseases

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,163,049
Expenses
$2,428,596
Assets
$4,577,005
Liabilities
$103,322

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Lawrence Hoffheimer (Chairman of the Board): $397,516 total reported compensation
  • Linda Patterson (Treasurer): $193,120 total reported compensation
  • Donna J Auger (Director): $146,220 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The MISSION of the PARKINSON RESEARCH FOUNDATION is to help find a cure for Parkinsons disease through funding research, while providing education and services that improve the quality of life today for Parkinson patients and their caregivers.

What it reported doing in 2025

Education Outreach Programs: The Parkinson Research Foundation (PRF) provides educational resources and support to individuals affected by Parkinsons disease, their caregivers, and healthcare professionals. Through its website, www.parkinsonhope.org, PRF disseminates up-to-date research findings, treatment advancements, and essential resources to improve patient care and disease management. PRF publishes a quarterly newsletter that informs the Parkinsons community about the latest clinical research, emerging therapies, and practical strategies for enhancing quality of life. In 2024, the newsletter reached 200,000 subscribers, furthering PRFs mission to educate and empower those impacted by Parkinsons disease.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 92% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 73% for direct work, and 27% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 51
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 46
  • Sustainability: 63
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 50.3%; rating input score 50
  • Program expense ratio: 63.5%; rating input score 63
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5.96 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 19; 19th 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: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 25%; rating input score 25; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 23.2%; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.88; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12.7%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.2% per year; rating input score 100; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.7% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.7% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 50.3% of revenue deployed · 63.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 1 of 4 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $398K · 5 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $381K reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 3 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.

Key Signals

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

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 50/100.
  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 25/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 19/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 55/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 27/100.