Cancer Association of Anderson

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
542098883
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Anderson, SC, USA
Phone
8642223500
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Health

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$913,965
Expenses
$573,268
Assets
$2,657,422
Liabilities
$100,305

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

Leadership & pay

25 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MARLENE MCCLAIN (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • ANGELA STRINGER (EXEC. DIRECT): $44,034 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The cancer association of anderson (caa) is the only local cancer charity in anderson county. Our mission is to help reduce the burden on anderson county residents who are battling cancer by providing treatment-related financial assistance, information and referral as well as emotional and physical support. Caa provides such services to cancer patients throughout anderson county at no cost, regardless of socioeconomic circumstances or where they receive medical treatment. Caa's various programs and services seek to complement our patients' cancer journeys through holistic and integrative/complementary approaches to cancer prevetion, survivorship, education and individual support.

What it reported doing in 2025

Financial assistance: in 2021, caa provided direct financial assistance to more than 5,200 cancer patients out of our 6,006 total cancer patient contacts who had such needs as prescription medicine, speciallized home- health medical equipment, travel to and from treatment - mileage reimbursement as well as transportation via caa's new vehicle (named hope) with a dedicated driver to assist patients and transport to treatment, and supplement due to increased volume by uber/lyft services when needed (both local and long distance), supplemental nutritional drinks such as boost/ensure, and enrollment in caa's new "well-fit" program, which educates patients in areas of nutrition, exercise & strength training, financial concerns during/after treatment, fmla-employee rights & smoking cessation, etc. (this program expanded upon the previous oncology rehab program). Additionally, caa paid insurance premiums for patients in danger of losing coverage due to being out of work during active cancer treatment and provided items such as free wigs, scarves and hats due to treatemnt related hair loss, medical equipment and supplies to patients. Also added in 2021 is caa's new neuromuscular therapy opportunity for cancer patients with scarring from surgery to work with advanced massage to reduce scar tissue and increase range of motion and most importantly, quality of life.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 94% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 68% for direct work, and 32% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. 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: 71
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 75
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 58.9%; rating input score 59
  • Program expense ratio: 90%; rating input score 90
  • Fundraising efficiency: $44.2 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 73; 73rd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • 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: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 37.3%; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.64; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.7%; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 17.2% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 58.9% of revenue deployed · 90% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 24 of 24 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $516K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $44K · 25 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 59/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 44/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 46/100.