Adolescent and Young Adult Cancer Alliance

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
874362890
IRS 990 coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2021
Location
Knoxville, TN, USA
Phone
7072677661
Rating
65
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Professional Societies, Associations

Reported finances

Revenue
$287,605
Expenses
$226,586
Assets
$74,359
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Simon Davies (President)
  • Christopher Terry (Past President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Rachel Westlake (Executive Dir.): $97,262 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Adolescent and Young Adult Cancer Alliance is a national group of healthcare professionals, researchers, nonprofit leaders, and advocates to enable transformative care for adolescents and young adults with cancer.

What it reported doing in 2025

During the fiscal year, AYACC advanced its mission to unite and strengthen the professionals who serve adolescents and young adults (AYAs) with cancer through three core areas of work. AYACC hosted its 2025 national conference in Chapel Hill, NC, bringing together 135 professionals from across the country, including oncologists, social workers, researchers, and nonprofit leaders, focused on improving AYA care for vulnerable populations. AYACC also launched a national digital professional community designed to reduce silos, share trusted resources, and connect professionals across disciplines and care settings. Within three weeks of launch, 25% of AYACC's email list joined the Network, and 80% of early members reported a positive or very positive first impression. The AYACC engaged 500+ professionals representing academic medical centers, children's hospitals, community health systems, national nonprofits, and industry partners. Through its Education Committee, AYACC continued quarterly Journal Clubs and monthly Research Picks, keeping clinicians, psychosocial providers, and nonprofit professionals current on emerging evidence in AYA oncology and survivorship. AYACC's contact list grew by 200 individuals during the year, and the professionals AYACC serves collectively support the approximately 90,000 adolescents and young adults diagnosed with cancer in the United States each year.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 96% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 99% 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 the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 78
  • Transparency & Controls: 83
  • Accountability: 18
  • Sustainability: 49
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 71.1%; rating input score 71
  • Program expense ratio: 90.2%; rating input score 90
  • Fundraising efficiency: $52.76 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • 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: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 21.2%; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.33; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 42.9%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 47.7% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 54.6% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 71.1% of revenue deployed · 90.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 15 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $204K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $97K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 21 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 18/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.