Society for Clinical Data Management Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
223333719
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2021
Forms available
Form 990 2021
Location
Mcclean, VA, USA
Phone
7036518188
Rating
49
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,551,650
Expenses
$1,579,583
Assets
$1,572,211
Liabilities
$457,255

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2021. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

People named in this filing

  • Sanjay Bhardwaj (Chairman)
  • Michael Goedde (Past Chair)
  • Mayank Anand (Vice Chair)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2021. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The purposes of the society are: to advance the discipline of clinical datamanagement as a profession; to support educational opportunities to improve skillsand specialized knowledge for the discipline of clinical data management; to advance professionalism within the discipline of clinical data management byproviding an environment for exchange of information and experience; to enhancecommunication between professional groups involved with clinical data management; topromote standards of good clinical practice within clinical data management.

What it reported doing in 2021

The good clinical data management practices (gcdmp) guide provides assistance toclinical data managers in their implementation of high quality clinical datamanagement processes and is used as a reference tool for clinical data managers whenpreparing for cdm training and education. The gcdmp is available to its membershipof more than 2,400 members (on average) and for purchase by non-members.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 96% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 34
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -1.8%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.29; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -6.3% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1.2% per year; rating input score 0; 16th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 7 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 15 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $818K reported
  • Consistency: 12 of 13 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2016 to 2021
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 22/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 38/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 25/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.