Trauma Research Foundation

Legal name: Trauma Research Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
824265340
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2024
Official website data refreshed
Jul 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2017
Location
Needham, MA, USA
Phone
6173353677
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Research Institutes and/or Public Policy Analysis

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,024,777
Expenses
$3,440,984
Assets
$4,532,273
Liabilities
$540,016

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BRUCE DIXON (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • BRUCE DIXON (CEO): $180,047 total reported compensation
  • CARRIER STEFFENSEN (DIRECTOR): $152,680 total reported compensation
  • LAURA BABALA MSW LCSW CYT (DIRECTOR): $100,962 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To advance the understanding and treatment of traumatic stress through research, education, and clinical innovation.

What it reported doing in 2024

Trauma research foundation is a community of researchers and clinicians who are committed to developing innovative methods for the treatment of people of all ages who have experienced trauma. In order to carry out our mission, we perform scientific research that translates into innovative body-based treatment modalities that can be used to help people heal from the impacts of trauma. Through our international trauma conference, certificate program in traumatic stress studies, and a variety of workshops led by our experienced faculty members and the trauma research foundation therapeutic alliance, we are able to reach a broad and diverse audience.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 83% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 83% 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 most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 85
  • Transparency & Controls: 54
  • Accountability: 86
  • Sustainability: 23
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 86.9%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 13th 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: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Fail
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 77.3%; rating input score 77; 20th 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: -69.9%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.32; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.12; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 15.6%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 35% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 17.9% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 21.8% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 6 programs and campaigns described on the official site
  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 86.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $180K · 9 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 4 contractors listed · $826K reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 32 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2018 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 8 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 47/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 18/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 55/100.