Cancan Health

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
202854546
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2015
Forms available
Form 990 2015
Location
Seattle, WA, USA
Phone
2069636556
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Voluntary Health Associations & Medical Disciplines N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$292,204
Expenses
$197,422
Assets
$180,405
Liabilities
$12,070

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • HEIKE MALAKOFF (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • HEIKE MALAKOFF (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $20,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Cancan is all about putting people into action about their health, giving them tools for early detection, prevention and self-advocacy. We give healthy women (and some men!), from all walks of life, a fun way to learn what they can do to feel more in control and less in fear about cancer. We also give cancer survivors a place to share the stories that can save lives.

What it reported doing in 2015

Cancan is all about putting people into action about their health, giving them tools for early detection, prevention and self-advocacy. We give healthy women (and some men!), from all walks of life, a fun way to learn what they can do to feel more in control and less in fear about cancer. We also give cancer survivors a place to share the stories that can save lives. The organization conducts educational seminars to small groups of people. The number of people educated in 2015 was 6,000.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of total spending goes to programs. 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: 60
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 62
  • Sustainability: 63
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 51.6%; rating input score 52
  • Program expense ratio: 76.3%; rating input score 76
  • Fundraising efficiency: $15.95 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 80%; rating input score 80; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: 32.4%; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.91; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.07; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.1%; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -5.7% per year; rating input score 0; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 21.7% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 17% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 51.6% of revenue deployed · 76.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 5 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $151K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $20K · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2011 to 2015
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 52/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 55/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 41/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 34/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 39/100.