The Hair Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
204532591
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2010–2014
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2014
Location
Chicago, IL, USA
Phone
8477783636
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public Health Program (Includes General Health and Wellness Promotion Services)

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$26,953
Expenses
$16,558
Assets
$29,706
Liabilities
$5,400

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MATT LEAVITT (President)
  • KENNETH WASHENIK MD (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • MATT LEAVITT (President)
  • KENNETH WASHENIK MD (Vice President)
  • ZOE DIANA DRAELOS MD (Secretary)

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

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To educate the public on the importance of hair health

What it reported doing in 2014

Develop, promote, and fund educational programs and materials, research, and public awareness related to hair health. Areas of interest include hair care, hair loss, styling, volume, disease and proven hair loss treatments.

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
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

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 52
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 63
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 41.7%; rating input score 42
  • Program expense ratio: 67.8%; rating input score 68

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 38.6%; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.79; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.18; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 54.6%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -25.2% per year; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -20.2% per year; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -11.9% per year; rating input score 0; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 41.7% of revenue deployed · 67.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $11K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2010 to 2014
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 42/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 20/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.