Sickle Cell Society Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237126801
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2016
Location
Pittsburgh, PA, USA
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Birth Defects and Genetic Diseases

Reported finances

Revenue
$43,194
Expenses
$83,914
Assets
$102,882
Liabilities
$73,440

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • FREDERICK D SAMS DMD (PRESIDENT)
  • SHERDINA K HILL (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • NEDDIE HOLLIS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • NEDDIE HOLLIS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $22,500 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To provide health and welfare to those with sickle cell disease

What it reported doing in 2016

Patient care - provides care coordination, education and psycological services to individuals suffering with sickle cell disease. The program provides services to individuals in pittsburgh and western Pennsylvania.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 20
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 80.5%; rating input score 81
  • Fundraising efficiency: $9.74 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -94.3%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.23; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.71; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 26.8%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 80.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $68K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $22K · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 54/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 20/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 28/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 9/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 12/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.