Wake Up Narcolepsy Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
263768711
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2011, Form 990-N 2008
Location
Worcester, MA, USA
Phone
3308401913
Rating
62
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Specifically Named Diseases

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,370,014
Expenses
$1,374,620
Assets
$619,318
Liabilities
$12,313

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Tammy Anderson (Executive Director)
  • Monica Gow (Former Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Tammy Anderson (Executive Director): $60,125 total reported compensation
  • Monica Gow (Former Executive Director): $36,630 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Wake Up Narcolepsy (WUN) is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization dedicated to driving Narcolepsy awareness, education and research towards improved treatments and a cure.

What it reported doing in 2024

Increasing awareness of Narcolepsy.Decreasing time-lapse from symptom onset to proper diagnosis.Providing supportive resources for people with Narcolepsy and their families.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 95% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 68% for direct work, and 32% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - Most voting board members are independent and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 49
  • Transparency & Controls: 57
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 35
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 54.6%; rating input score 55
  • Program expense ratio: 53.5%; rating input score 54
  • Fundraising efficiency: $2.44 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 19th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th 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: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • 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: -0.3%; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.45; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7%; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.3% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 13.2% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 16.3% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 54.6% of revenue deployed · 53.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $736K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $60K · 14 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 31 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 9 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 55/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 54/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 7/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 34/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 21/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Document-retention policy not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 47/100.