Cancer Center of Western Wisconsin Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 273238660
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2011–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- New Richmond, WI, USA
- Phone
- 7152432879
- Rating
- 75
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Health
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $4,775,430
- Expenses
- $6,330,214
- Assets
- $3,745,818
- Liabilities
- $1,697,760
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
8 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- STEVEN MASSEY (PRESIDENT)
- MICHAEL YOUSO (VICE PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- MICHAEL YOUSO (VICE PRESIDENT): $569,758 total reported compensation
- DOUGLAS JOHNSON (TREASURER 1/1 TO 7/1): $540,868 total reported compensation
- DEBRA RUDQUIST (BOARD MEMBER): $481,799 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Mission: to provide screening, prevention, treatment, recovery and survivorship services to people in our communities. Vision: to be the leader in our communities in preventing and treating cancer with the best medical expertise by providing comprehensive services and care to patients and families close to home.organization: the cancer center of western Wisconsin brings the expertise of six community hospitals, oncology care and radiation therapy together into a circle of seamless services aimed at prevention, early detection and treatment of cancer, through clinical trial. Formed in may of 2011, the cancer center partners with both minneapolis radiation oncology and healthpartners to focus on treating those diagnosed with cancer and helping them to maintain a high quality life.
What it reported doing in 2024
Oncology services - new richmond: provide medical oncology services in new richmond, Wisconsin.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 88% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- 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 available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 88
- Transparency & Controls: 68
- Accountability: 68
- Sustainability: 16
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 98.1%; rating input score 98
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Missing
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 2 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 22
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -32.6%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.59; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.45; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 6.5%; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 5.9% per year; rating input score 100; 45th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 2.1% per year; rating input score 100; 21st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 7.4% per year; rating input score 100; 47th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 98.1% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 2 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $6.2M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $570K · 8 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $2.7M reported
- Consistency: 20 of 20 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
- Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 13 filed related-organization links
- 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 8 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 4/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 21/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 23/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 44/100.