The Thomas E Smith Fight to Cure Paralysis Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
272801227
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2012, Form 990-N 2010
Location
Andover, MA, USA
Phone
9783143020
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and/or Fund Distribution

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$576,704
Expenses
$800,749
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • THOMAS E SMITH (PRESIDENT/CO-FOUNDER & TRUSTEE)
  • SARAH MERREFIELD (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR/COO)

Highest reported compensation

  • SARAH MERREFIELD (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR/COO): $212,856 total reported compensation
  • THOMAS E SMITH (PRESIDENT/CO-FOUNDER & TRUSTEE): $209,386 total reported compensation
  • CHRISTOPHER K SMITH (CHIEF ADVANCEMENT OFFICER/TRUSTEE): $208,914 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 thomas e. Smith foundation is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization whose mission is to better the lives of those affected by and living with paralysis through financial and emotional support, as well as supporting preventive innovations that decrease the risk of spinal cord injuries.

What it reported doing in 2025

Stronger together grant program (grant program disbursements): the thomas e. Smith foundation maintains its stronger together grant program, which supports individuals and families affected by and living with paralysis. In 2025 this program distributed $200,374 in grants for various expenses not covered by insurance, such as: physical therapy, home modifications, nursing care, equipment, and research.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 92% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 46% for direct work, and 54% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 54
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 56
  • Sustainability: 2
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 67.1%; rating input score 67
  • Program expense ratio: 46.4%; rating input score 46
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.71 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: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 33.3%; rating input score 33; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -38.8%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 47.3%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 16.9% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.3% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.8% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 67.1% of revenue deployed · 46.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 1 of 3 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $372K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $213K · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2022 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 filed related-organization links
  • 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 33/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 46/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 11/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 3/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 2/100.