Beloved Foundation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 270718342
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2017–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2011
- Location
- Redlands, CA, USA
- Phone
- 9097923191
- Rating
- 60
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Hospices
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,019,080
- Expenses
- $545,684
- Assets
- $1,468,842
- Liabilities
- $3,264
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
7 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JOE RICHARDSON (President)
- VICTORIA MARSHALL (Vice President)
Highest reported compensation
- SHERI BOGH (Executive Dir.): $64,133 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
We provide assistance to families caring for cancer patients
What it reported doing in 2025
The organization provided up to 3 months of financial assistance to individuals caring for a family member with terminal cancer and in hospice care. Funds are normally paid directly to the service providers -- utilities and mortgage companies, medical and burial services, etc. In 2022, over 120 people benefited by receiving grants in our local community and over 110 cancer care kits were sent all across the continental us. Due to covid 19 and the pandemic, the organization still had to pause some of our programs and events, including our climb program, which was to be an in-person counseling group for children affected by cancer, but the organization was able to mail out at-home activities for the parents to do their children while stuck at home to help normalize the cancer diagnosis for them. Grant recipients were unrelated to our board members, officers, donors or their families.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 89% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 61% of its reported program spending out as grants.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 48
- Transparency & Controls: 75
- Accountability: 50
- Sustainability: 76
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 36.5%; rating input score 37
- Program expense ratio: 66.7%; rating input score 67
- Fundraising efficiency: $16.73 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 62.9%; rating input score 63; 35th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 0 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 46.5%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.69; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 11.8%; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 8.6% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 18.6% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 38.4% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 36.5% of revenue deployed · 66.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 6 of 7 board members independent · 0 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $364K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $64K · 7 people listed
- Consistency: 32 of 34 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes grants
- Filing history: 9 filing years from 2017 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
- 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 37/100.
- High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 6 not reported.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 50/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 32/100.