The Joe Martin ALS Foundation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 260163120
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2012–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Charlotte, NC, USA
- Phone
- 7043321929
- Rating
- 77
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Fund Raising and/or Fund Distribution
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $666,450
- Expenses
- $489,194
- Assets
- $1,298,212
- Liabilities
- $10,371
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
9 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Neil Cottrell (President)
Highest reported compensation
- Neil Cottrell (President): $100,000 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The purpose of the Foundation is to provide service to individuals living with Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis ALS, also called Lou Gehrig's disease, and their families by providing homecare aides who will i assist ALS patients with daily living activities such as getting in and out of bed, eating, showering and dressing for the day ii provide exercise sessions designed to improve blood circulation, reduce swelling, prevent contracture, blood clots and the loss of bone density iii respite care to provide family members of ALS patients the opportunity to attend to their own needs iv train family members and ALS patients to use various equipment and devices designed to enable ALS patients to communicate v loan assistive devices to ALS patients vi provide transportation for ALS patients vii provide ALS patients and their families assistance with travel planning and other activities that become much more difficult when a family member has ALS. The Foundation provides these services without c
What it reported doing in 2025
Respite Care - The Joe Martin ALS Foundation provides respite care at no cost for ALS patients. This includes getting patients out of bed, dressing, bathing, eating and starting a productive day. Respite care relieves the patient's family members of these responsibilities and allows the primary caregivers to take a break or attend to their own needs. The average number of families served for the year is 18 per week, with 6 hours per week for each family. Therefore, approximately 5,616 hours of respite care was provided at no cost to ALS patients.
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
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 65
- Transparency & Controls: 86
- Accountability: 84
- Sustainability: 68
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 60.6%; rating input score 61
- Program expense ratio: 80.8%; rating input score 81
- Fundraising efficiency: $10.68 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 24th 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; 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: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 26.6%; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.65; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 20.4%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 8.6% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 10.5% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 13.5% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 60.6% of revenue deployed · 80.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments · $395K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $100K · 9 people listed
- Consistency: 22 of 23 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
- 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 37/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 16/100.