Wallace Rheumatic Disease Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
455434561
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2016
Location
Beverly Hills, CA, USA
Phone
7472033377
Rating
26
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Medical Research N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue
$188,035
Expenses
$127,006
Assets
$100,755
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

1 person listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DANIEL WALLACE (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • DANIEL WALLACE (PRESIDENT): $30,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Funding cutting-edge research, fellowship programs and patient access to care grants.

What it reported doing in 2025

Funding or postgraduate training to rheumatology fellows, providing grants for medical care

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 7
  • Transparency & Controls: 63
  • Accountability: 5
  • Sustainability: 60
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 6.5%; rating input score 7
  • Program expense ratio: 9.6%; rating input score 10
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 0%; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 32.5%; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.79; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 23.6%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -18.3% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -7% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -10.4% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 6.5% of revenue deployed · 9.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 1 board members independent · 1 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $12K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $30K · 1 people listed
  • Consistency: 16 of 17 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2017 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 7/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 10/100.
  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 35/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 15/100.
  • Review — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization could not be resolved against the register, so the check is unfinished.