Progressive Familial Intrahepatic Cholestasis
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 831084501
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2021–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2020, Form 990-N 2018
- Location
- Stanton, KY, USA
- Phone
- 4143313316
- Rating
- 69
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Alliance/Advocacy Organizations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $696,612
- Expenses
- $529,691
- Assets
- $458,434
- Liabilities
- $109,274
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
8 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Emily Ventura (Co-Founder Executive Director)
- Walter Perez (President)
- Charmaine Gravener (Vice President)
Highest reported compensation
- Emily Ventura (Co-Founder Executive Director): $74,132 total reported compensation
- Tara Kearns (Co-Founder): $3,775 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 patients and families worldwide affected by Progressive Familial Intrahepatic Cholestasis, PFIC.
What it reported doing in 2025
In 2025 PFIC Network provided program services in the areas of peer support, education, outreach, advocacy and research to further our mission of improving the lives of patients and families affected by PFIC worldwide. We continued to offer care packages, conference travel scholarships and direct financial assistance to patients and families in more than 10 countries. In June, we completed IMPACT (Identifying research targets by Merging Patient And Clinician Treatment information), a two-year project which produced a research roadmap of patient-identified priorities and helped us build an educated and motivated body of patients and families interested in pursuing further involvement in research. This project was funded by a Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) Eugene Washington Engagement Award (EASO-30455). Additionally, we were awarded a second PCORI Engagement Award (EACB-42398) to build on the work started in IMPACT by establishing a patient-centered research consortium. In July, we co-hosted the first-ever Cholestatic Liver Disease Summit alongside two other cholestatic liver disease organizations, Biliary Atrestia Research and Education and Alagille Syndrome Alliance, in lieu of our annual PFIC Family and Scientific Conference. The conference hosted over 300 attendees over 3 days in Aurora, Colorado. Collaborating with related disease groups allowed us to expand our network of clinicians and researchers, provide more opportunities for peer connection through the larger numbers of patients and families in attendance, and open the door for multi-organization collaboration in cholestatic liver disease research. Other program highlights include co-authoring and publishing the first manuscript sharing patient-reported outcomes from our patient registry and directly funding a research study aimed at identifying genetic causes of cholestasis in undiagnosed children. In addition to support and research accomplishments, PFIC Network put significant effort into enhancing the user interface for our website, our main platform for delivering education materials. PFIC Network has also added material on adults, genetics and diagnosis, and plans to add new content into 2026 while continuing to assess and respond to the educational needs of our community.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 75% for direct work, and 25% for grants.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 60
- Transparency & Controls: 72
- Accountability: 81
- Sustainability: 53
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 55.2%; rating input score 55
- Program expense ratio: 72.6%; rating input score 73
- Fundraising efficiency: $14.53 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 24th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Claims monitoring procedures: Fail
- Requires narrative reports: Fail
- Conducts field audits: Fail
- May suspend future funding: Fail
- Requires financial reports: Fail
- Conducts site visits: Fail
- Requires grant agreements: Fail
- May require repayment: Fail
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 75%; rating input score 75; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- 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: 24%; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.87; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.24; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 14.7%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 12.8% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 16.1% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 10.6% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 55.2% of revenue deployed · 72.6% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 6 of 8 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $385K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $74K · 8 people listed
- Consistency: 33 of 34 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and grants
- Filing history: 5 filing years from 2021 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 3 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.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 55/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 46/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 39/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 23/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 25/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.