Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 28

Thread: NRS Form 990 Report for 2007

  1. #1
    Senior Member Brady Barrows's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Honolulu, HI, USA
    Posts
    4,730

    Default NRS Form 990 Report for 2007

    The National Rosacea Society's Form 990 for 2007 has just been released and you can download a copy from the NRS web site at this url:

    http://www.rosacea.org/about/nrs_990_2007.pdf

    The report shows that this year the NRS received $824,986 in donations and spent $100,000 on rosacea research which is just over 12% of the total donations which is the second highest percentage spent on rosacea research since the NRS began doing research in 1998. This is an improvement. The report continues to show that two of the three highest paid independent contractors used by the NRS, Glendale Communications Group, Inc., and Park Mailing and Fulfillment, Inc., an affiliate of Glendale, received in 2007 $529,964 which is 64% of the total donations received. This is 3% more than 2006 and whether this is an improvement for the NRS or Glendale you be the judge. Glendale is owned by Sam Huff who is the director of the NRS.

    The NRS has received in donations from 1998 thru 2007 $7,805,271. Over this same period (1998 thru 2007) a total of $4,769,670 (61%) the NRS has spent on two independent contractors, Glendale Communcations Group, Inc., of Barrington, Illoinois which is owned by Sam Huff and another independent contractor, Park Mailing and Fulfillment, Inc., which is an affiliate of Glendale.

    For the years 1998 thru 2007 the NRS has received in donations a total of $7,805,271 and spent a total of $785,746 on rosacea research. That means that about 10% of total donations was spent on research. That means that of every dollar donated to the NRS about ten cents is spent on research.
    Last edited by Brady Barrows; 5th August 2008 at 05:12 AM.
    Brady Barrows
    Join the RRDi

  2. #2
    Moderator phlika29's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Dorset, UK
    Posts
    8,371

    Default

    Brady

    How does this compare with other similar organisations?

    Sarah

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Berlin, Germany
    Posts
    295

    Default

    and what are the other 90% spent on?

  4. #4
    Moderator Melissa W's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    new york
    Posts
    10,135

    Default

    The salaries for the employees and independent contractors Eric.

    That's a good question Sarah about how it compares to other organisations but I have to say I don't think it compares well. When I donate to charities/organisations I always check what percentage is going to the actual cause. 10% sucks. I always aim for above 70% if possible with some exceptions but I would NOT donate to an organisation that spent a mere 10% on the cause I was donating to.

    Thanks Brady for sharing the info with us.

    Melissa

  5. #5
    Senior Member Brady Barrows's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Honolulu, HI, USA
    Posts
    4,730

    Default other non profits

    Quote Originally Posted by phlika29 View Post
    Brady

    How does this compare with other similar organisations?

    Sarah
    Sarah,
    A good place to start to compare non profits are the following links:

    http://guidestar.org
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-profit_organization
    http://www.gsb.stanford.edu/csi/research/spen.html

    Most people have very little knowledge of how non profits work. The basic difference between a non profit and a profit organization is that donations are tax deductable. The IRS approves whether a non profit qualifies for this designation. It is absolutely legal what the NRS does. Many non profits pay huge salaries to the board members or the chief executive officers or to independent private contractors that are owned by the board members. Before giving a dime to any non profit it is a good idea to look at the Form 990 that is required by law for any non profit organization to file with the IRS if the organization receives more than $25,000 in a given year. Form 990 shows how the organization spends the donations.

    The basic two types of non profits are a closed board non profit organization like the NRS and a member board organization that the members elect the board members like the RRDi:

    http://www.irosacea.org

    With a closed board non profit there is nothing anyone can do about changing the board of directors. With a member driven board the members can replace the board members and have accountability to the members. My opinion is that while the NRS has done some good for rosaceans there is an obvious special interest between how the NRS spends its donations on independent contractors and who sits on the board of directors. There are better ways this money could be spent. However, because the organization is a closed board there is nothing anyone can do about it. That is why I set up the RRDi which is a member driven non profit organization. The members have a say in how the board operates.
    Brady Barrows
    Join the RRDi

  6. #6
    Senior Member Brady Barrows's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Honolulu, HI, USA
    Posts
    4,730

    Default form 990

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric View Post
    and what are the other 90% spent on?
    Eric,

    Take 15 minutes and download the form 990 and see where the money goes. Every person has a right to see the Form 990 that a non profit organization in the USA has to file to the IRS. Donating to a non profit organization and not looking at form 990 is what most people do. I suggest everyone everyone look BEFORE donating. It might give you an idea of what the non profit organization is doing.
    Brady Barrows
    Join the RRDi

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    333

    Default form 990

    Just my opinion of course !
    It seems a lot of wasted money spent on useless research only to eventually find that fat causes
    rosacea and other skin related problems.

  8. #8
    Moderator Melissa W's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    new york
    Posts
    10,135

    Default

    It seems that you can allocate 100% of what you donate to go where you want it to when you donate to the NRS. So, I just wanted to share that info with you guys. When I donate to any charity I always spell out where I want the money to go. Usually I write where it is most needed but sometimes I am more explicit. So, if you wanted to donate to NRS you could just say exactly where you want that money spent.

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    133

    Default

    This is a thread where I have some expertise. As a CPA, I'm familiar with Form 990s (I've prepared more than a few). I didn't review the return in exhaustive detail, but my conclusion is that overhead/fundraising is not unreasonable. (I have absolutely no affiliation with the organization.)

    On the first page, this is the expenditure breakdown: $706K for Program Services, $72K for Management and general, and $62K for Fundraising. With total expenditures equal to $839K, the percentages are 84% going for Program Services, 9% for Management and general, and 7% for Fundraising. This is a good result.

    The $100K in grants is relatively small part of Program Services. Page 3 of the return shows how the total $706K was spent, i.e. $76K for Medical Scientific Education, $157K for Public Awareness, $357K for Public Education, and $114K for Grants ($100K was awarded to recipients with the remainder for associated expenses). Footnotes starting on page 23 provide specific details for each category of program service.

    The mission of the organization is shown on page 20. Program service expenditures are consistent with the organization's mission.

    The return was prepared by an independent organization. I'm guessing the preparer was a lawyer because a CPA would so indicate when signing. For a small organization it isn't unusual for a lawyer to prepare the return.

    The disclosure on page 26 is an area of possible concern. Three of the directors are employed by Glendale Communications which received $421K from the organization (just about 50% of total expenditures). Moreover, those three directors are also the officers, i.e. President, Treasurer, and Secretary. The disclosure states that those directors abstain from voting on an issue affecting Glendale and that a board committee closely monitors all expenditures to Glendale (there are 4 additional directors). Theoretically, this should take care of any conflict of interest, but I think it would be more seemly if these individuals were not officers. I'm not alleging anything improper is going on. But some might see it as the appearance of a conflict of interest.

    There was no detail on where contributions (revenue) came from. Schedule B (page 17) doesn't include Part I and II which discloses who contributed $5K or more. I suppose it is possible that no one contributed $5K, but if I were preparing the return I would so state. Given the amount of revenue, it is surprising that no one would have contributed at least $5K, but I suppose that may be the case.

    Glendale Communications has a website. Many of Glendale's clients are pharmaceutical companies (some of which may have a rosacea product). What this suggests to me: Aside from the grants, the organization may be a means to get the message out for their clients' products (look at the program services categories). There is nothing underhanded about that. Many non-profits do that sort of thing. Everyone with rosacea will be extremely grateful to the pharmaceutical company that comes up with a better product, if not cure. I won't begrudge any pharmaceutical company that earns a healthy profit (but not obscene profit) from a product that helps me.
    Last edited by GuyinLA; 6th August 2008 at 01:34 AM.

  10. #10
    Moderator Melissa W's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    new york
    Posts
    10,135

    Default

    Thanks GuyinLa for interpreting this for us. I think this paints a much more positive and perhaps objective picture of the NRS than originally posted.


    The disclosure on page 26 is an area of possible concern. Three of the directors are employed by Glendale Communications which received $421K from the organization (just about 50% of total expenditures). Moreover, those three directors are also the officers, i.e. President, Treasurer, and Secretary.
    I do find that to be somewhat troubling but your explanation makes me feel more positive about the NRS.

    Thanks again for your time interpreting this for us GuyinLA!

    Best wishes,
    Melissa

Similar Threads

  1. NRS Form 990 for 2011
    By Brady Barrows in forum News, research articles and current affairs
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 12th December 2012, 02:25 AM
  2. NRS Form 990 for 2006 Now Available
    By Brady Barrows in forum News, research articles and current affairs
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 22nd August 2007, 08:39 PM
  3. NRS Form 990 Available for Public Viewing
    By Brady Barrows in forum News, research articles and current affairs
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 6th August 2006, 11:14 PM
  4. NRS Form 990 Report for 2004
    By Brady Barrows in forum News, research articles and current affairs
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 22nd September 2005, 06:10 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •