Ssadh Association Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
371695651
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Delafield, WI, USA
Phone
2626465133
Rating
57
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and/or Fund Distribution

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$212,105
Expenses
$78,442
Assets
$596,832
Liabilities
$8,500

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BRADLEY J HOFFMAN (PRESIDENT AND DIRECTOR)

People named in this filing

  • BRADLEY J HOFFMAN (PRESIDENT AND DIRECTOR)
  • CAROLYN A HOFFMAN (VP, SECRETARY & DIRECTOR)
  • JAMES N KECK JR (TREASURER AND DIRECTOR)

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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Ssadh is an organization representing patients and families affected by a disease of gaba related neurotransmitter metabolism. Our mission is to further an understanding and fund scientific research regarding succinic semialdehyde dehydrogenase deficiency ("ssadh") with the ultimate goal of developing treatments and a cure for ssadh, and to assist those we represent through education, advocacy and research.

What it reported doing in 2024

Biorepository project at boston children's hospital. The biorepository started at wsu to fill a missing need for access to samples in order to accomplish the mission to fully understand disease mechanisms, identify novel therapeutic targets and find unique biomarkers to help monitor disease progression or therapeutic interventions. Key to progress has been and will continue to be the availability of bio specimens (e.g., blood, urine, saliva, hair, skin for fibroblasts) for biochemical or genetic analyses, and the ability to correlate molecular or biochemical findings with relevant clinical information.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 90% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

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: 25
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 83
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 22.3%; rating input score 22
  • Program expense ratio: 37.6%; rating input score 38
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 63%; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 7.61; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1% per year; rating input score 0; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.6% per year; rating input score 0; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.4% per year; rating input score 100; 45th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 22.3% of revenue deployed · 37.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $30K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 20 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 22/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 38/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 43/100.