The Stone Research Foundation for Sports Medicine and Arthritis

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
943228007
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2017
Location
San Francisco, CA, USA
Phone
4159211220
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Health

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,179,055
Expenses
$1,582,110
Assets
$1,149,057
Liabilities
$115,416

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Kevin R Stone MD (Chairman): $250,000 total reported compensation
  • Mani Vessal (Dir Research & Ops): $237,231 total reported compensation
  • Simaron Dhillon (Research Prgm Mgr): $106,289 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To advance both scientific and educational enrichment of sports medicine and arthritis and to disseminate the results of analytical and scientific studies.

What it reported doing in 2025

Successes: For over a decade the Foundation has helped to bring regenerative joint repair solutions directly to patients. Our research focuses on analyzing leading-edge biologic techniques that stimulate the body's ability to heal itself. In the past, artificial joint replacement was the primary option for treating debilitating joint disease. Today, patients have the option of regenerative repair which is less invasive, allows for faster healing and restores biologic joint services. Biologic joint services are superior to metal and plastics because they feel more natural in the body and allow for activity levels not possible with artificial joint replacement. Outcome studies and preclinical research conducted by the Foundation support treatments that return patients to healthier, more active, and more productive lives than was previously possible.Education: Physicians and other medical professionals learn leading-edge treatments emanating from the research performed. Worldwide publications and presentations proliferate those results.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 91% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 68
  • Sustainability: 16
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 98.2%; rating input score 98
  • Program expense ratio: 73.2%; rating input score 73
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.61 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 80%; rating input score 80; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Limited
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -34.2%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.73; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.1; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 37.5%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 26.3% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 18.8% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 22.1% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 98.2% of revenue deployed · 73.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 5 board members independent · 4 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $250K · 7 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $283K reported
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2019 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 11/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 3/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 34/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 4/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 35/100.