Pfscm

Legal name: Partnership for Supply Chain Management

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
203258654
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Arlington, VA, USA
Phone
5712278600
Rating
54
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$490,016,158
Expenses
$484,566,878
Assets
$133,387,675
Liabilities
$117,735,797

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • EDWARD WILSON (PRESIDENT & CLERK (NON-VOTING))

Highest reported compensation

  • MARGARET CROTTY (FORMER DIRECTOR): $749,074 total reported compensation
  • MUKACHILIMA CHIKUBA (DIRECTOR (AS OF 10/2024)): $559,563 total reported compensation
  • JANICE CLARK (DIRECTOR): $494,676 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

PFSCM ensures lifesaving health products are accessible and available to communities in hard-to-reach places.

What it reported doing in 2024

The partnership for supply chain management (pfscm) project teams collaborate with institutions that are among the most trusted names in international public health and development. This includes four institutions, each one offering unique capabilities that ensure that high-quality arv drugs, HIV tests, and other supplies for treating HIV/AIDS are available to the people, patients, clinicians, laboratory technicians, and others who need them.the pooled procurement mechanism (ppm) project is funded by the global fund to fight AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria. Comprehensive public health programs require a continuous flow of essential medicines and supplies. (see schedule o).the projects were created to improve the supply chain to deliver an uninterrupted supply of high-quality, affordable products.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% 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. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 85
  • Transparency & Controls: 39
  • Accountability: 32
  • Sustainability: 32
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 95.4%; rating input score 95
  • Program expense ratio: 96.7%; rating input score 97
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th 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: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 1.1%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.28; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.88; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0.4%; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -9.7% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -4.9% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -6.6% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 3 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 5 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 95.4% of revenue deployed · 96.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 3 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $468.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $749K · 11 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $30.1M reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes foreign activity and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 38/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 9/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 14/100.