Tick-borne Disease Alliance Fka Turn the Corner Foundation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 030392311
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2012–2013
- Forms available
- Form 990 2013
- Location
- New York, NY, USA
- Phone
- 6464504882
- Rating
- 72
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Education N.E.C.
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $881,367
- Expenses
- $1,109,143
- Assets
- $894,078
- Liabilities
- $46,979
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
16 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- STACI GRODIN (PRESIDENT)
- DREW GOLDMAN (VICE-PRESIDENT)
- NAN KURZMAN (VICE-PRESIDENT)
- JODI NASS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- JODI NASS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $108,333 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Dynamic, inclusive and passionate, the tick-borne disease alliance is dedicated to raising awareness, promoting advocacy and supporting initiatives to find a cure for tick-borne diseases, including lyme.
What it reported doing in 2013
Dynamic, inclusive and passionate, the tick-borne disease alliance (tbda) is dedicated to raising awareness, supporting initiatives and promoting advocacy to find a cure for tick-borne diseases, including lyme. Mindful of the urgency of this escalating public health crisis, turn the corner foundation, co-founded by staci grodin, and the tick-borne disease initiative, founded by david roth, decided to consolidate their efforts in the fight for a cure. In early 2012, they joined forces to form a new, national organization-the tbda. As part of our efforts to raise funds to support much-needed research, tbda will embark on a quest to develop a diagnostic tool as a first step toward eradicating the diseases. Working with others in the tick-borne disease community nationwide, tbda seeks to raise public awareness through education and create a unified voice for advocacy regarding the current epidemic in order to make a real difference.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 78% for direct work, and 22% for grants.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and revenue has declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 66
- Transparency & Controls: 89
- Accountability: 90
- Sustainability: 26
- Growth: 0
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 79.3%; rating input score 79
- Program expense ratio: 63%; rating input score 63
- Fundraising efficiency: $3.39 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 95.5%; rating input score 95; 37th percentile among comparable filings
- 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: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -25.8%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.81; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 9.8%; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: -21.4% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -20.3% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 79.3% of revenue deployed · 63% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $699K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $108K · 16 people listed
- Consistency: 31 of 32 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 2 filing years from 2012 to 2013
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 3 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.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 12/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 5/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 40/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 36/100.