The Tanner Foundation for Neurological Diseases

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
200417645
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2015
Location
Birmingham, AL, USA
Phone
2058032210
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Support N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue
$264,855
Expenses
$289,251
Assets
$159,129
Liabilities
$14,005

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JONATHAN TANNER (PRESIDENT)
  • JENNIFER ELY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • MELISSA ENFINGER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • TRACY FLEMMING TRACY (EXEC. DIRECTOR/RESEARCH): $149,714 total reported compensation
  • JENNIFER ELY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $62,308 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The tanner center is a multidisciplinary clinic offering initial evaluations, second opinions, symptoms management, infusion therapy, rehabilitation, counseling, and clinical research.

What it reported doing in 2024

The tanner center for ms is a full member of the consortorium of ms centers through providing comprehensive care of persons with ms and in leading research related to the disease. Through comprehensive services, research and educational opportunities for patients, caregivers, and healthcare professionals, the center qualifies to be a part of the few distinguished centers offering excellence in ms care.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% 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.

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: 67
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 65
  • Sustainability: 22
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 75.9%; rating input score 76
  • Program expense ratio: 69.5%; rating input score 70
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.62 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 25th 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: 71.4%; rating input score 71; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 56
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -9.2%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.55; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.09; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 73.3%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.9% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.1% per year; rating input score 100; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.3% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 75.9% of revenue deployed · 69.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 7 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $201K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $150K · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 25 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 16/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 23/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 26/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 27/100.