Society for Neuroscience

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
520895843
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024, Form 990-N 2017
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2029624000
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Professional Societies, Associations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$36,716,820
Expenses
$29,419,966
Assets
$134,571,669
Liabilities
$32,754,636

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

Leadership & pay

25 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOHN MORRISON (PRESIDENT)
  • NICK SPITZER (PRESIDENT-ELECT)
  • MARINA PICCIOTTO (PAST-PRESIDENT)
  • MARTIN SAGGESE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • MARTIN SAGGESE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $976,720 total reported compensation
  • CORI SPENCER (SR. DIR., FIN. & MGMT SVC/CFO): $375,639 total reported compensation
  • PAULA KARA (SR. DIR., MEETING SERVICES): $359,182 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Sfn's mission is to: 1. Advance the understanding of the brain and the nervous system by bringing together scientists of all segments of neuroscience, by facilitating the integration of research directed at all levels of biological organization, (continued on schedule o)

What it reported doing in 2024

Journal of neuroscience mission is to publish excellent science that can be discussed, debated, studied, and built upon to advance the understanding of the brain and the nervous system. At the core of eneuro is a commitment to provide authors with a fair assessment of their work, with any additional experiments requested thoroughly justified, while maintaining high standards of peer review.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 75% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 95% 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

SUPPORTED - 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 the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 57
  • Transparency & Controls: 72
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 71
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 58.1%; rating input score 58
  • Program expense ratio: 72.6%; rating input score 73
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Pass
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 99%; rating input score 99; 32nd 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; 66th 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 19.9%; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.57; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.24; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 11.5%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -2% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.3% per year; rating input score 100; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.1% per year; rating input score 100; 29th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 58.1% of revenue deployed · 72.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $21.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $977K · 25 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $469K reported
  • Consistency: 42 of 43 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 10 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 12 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.

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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 58/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 15/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 53/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.