Pulsepoint Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
452725805
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2012
Location
Pleasanton, CA, USA
Phone
9258993080
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Ambulance, Emergency Medical Transport Services

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,627,662
Expenses
$3,724,580
Assets
$1,222,103
Liabilities
$2,024,819

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • RICHARD PRICE (EXEC. DIRECTOR): $348,209 total reported compensation
  • DAVID BROWN (CHIEF ARCHITECT/FELLOW ENGINEER): $287,752 total reported compensation
  • CHARLES D BOYLE (CHIEF TECHNOLOGY OFFICER): $275,989 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To build applications that help public safety agencies inform and engage their citizens. Through the use of modern, location-aware mobile devices pulsepoint builds applications that work with local public safety agencies to improve communications with citizens and off-duty professionals to help reduce the millions of annual deaths from sudden cardiac arrest.

What it reported doing in 2024

The foundation builds and maintains pulsepoint respond, a 911-connected app that can immediately inform trained individuals when cpr or an automated external defibrillator (aed) is needed nearby. The goal of the platform is to improve patient outcomes and save lives by reducing collapse-to-cpr and collapse-to-defibrillation times. Pulsepoint also hosts and administers the national emergency aed registry (near). Near seeks to improve cardiac arrest outcomes by equipping emergency telecommunicators with aed locations for use during cardiac arrest call processing.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 99% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 96
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 92
  • Sustainability: 15
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 96.7%; rating input score 97
  • Program expense ratio: 94.2%; rating input score 94
  • Fundraising efficiency: $1,025.43 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 13th 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: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 59.7%; rating input score 60; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -2.7%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.33; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.66; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 53.2%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 15.2% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 15.6% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.5% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 96.7% of revenue deployed · 94.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 7 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $3.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $348K · 13 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 32 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 13 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

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

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 25/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 10/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.