Scleroderma Research Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
680087234
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
San Francisco, CA, USA
Phone
4158349444
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$13,131,089
Expenses
$10,325,525
Assets
$42,239,970
Liabilities
$25,351,409

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

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Gregory Gordon (Chief Medical Officer): $527,375 total reported compensation
  • Joanne Gold (Executive Dir.): $238,267 total reported compensation
  • Gloria Blecha (VP Communications): $195,142 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 Scleroderma Research Foundation is to fund and facilitate the most promising, highest quality research aimed at new treatments and, ultimately, a cure for scleroderma.

What it reported doing in 2025

The mission of the Scleroderma Research Foundation (SRF) is to find, fund, and facilitate the most promising, highest-quality research to cure scleroderma. We recruit the best and the brightest researchers to understand the causes, discover treatments, and ultimately eradicate this disease . At the SRF, research is at the center of all we do. Our Research Program is governed by the Board of Directors and supported by a volunteer Scientific Advisory Board comprised of some of the world's most highly regarded scientists who are leaders in their field of expertise. The Board of Directors and Scientific Advisors meet annually with researchers and clinicians from laboratories across the nation to select and fund the most promising scleroderma studies aimed at developing improved therapies to help patients live longer, fuller lives - and, ultimately, to find a cure for scleroderma.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 60% for direct work, and 40% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 76
  • Transparency & Controls: 63
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 62
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 75%; rating input score 75
  • Program expense ratio: 91%; rating input score 91
  • Fundraising efficiency: $9.96 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • 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; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 21.4%; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.09; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.6; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 13.1%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 14.5% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 14.4% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 21.9% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 75% of revenue deployed · 91% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $9.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $527K · 18 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.3M reported
  • Consistency: 37 of 38 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 32 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 26 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 33/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Board meeting minutes documented not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 15/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 19/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.