Cancer Foundation of Santa Barbara

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
952158727
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Santa Barbara, CA, USA
Phone
8088982187
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Health

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$12,010,526
Expenses
$7,869,485
Assets
$157,521,262
Liabilities
$678,366

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

22 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LORI WILLIS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • LORI WILLIS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $250,839 total reported compensation
  • STEPHANIE CARLYLE (DIRECTOR OF PHILANTHROPY): $180,973 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The cancer foundation is the leading sponsor and largest donor to the ridley-tree cancer center at sansum clinic, the largest provider of cancer care on the central coast. Each year, the foundation commits a minimum of 85% (up to 100%) of the proceeds from the foundation's endowment and fundraising efforts to support cancer diagnosis, treatment, research, technology, and support programs in our ridley-tree cancer center. The remaining 15% may be used to support other cancer related programs in santa barbara county. Historically, these have included oncology benchmark research at ucsb, pediatric cancer care, and navigators at cottage health system. All of foundation proceeds must be used to support cancer care in the community.

What it reported doing in 2024

To ensure santa barbara remains in the vanguard of cancer care, the cancer foundation raises and distributes millions of dollars each year to ridley-tree cancer center at sansum clinic, now part of sutter health, allowing the center to deliver a higher level of care than would otherwise be possible in a community of our size, on par with some of the most renowed cancer centers in the us.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 60% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 75
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 87
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 83.4%; rating input score 83
  • Program expense ratio: 78.2%; rating input score 78
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5.61 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 99.8%; rating input score 100; 37th 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; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 34.5%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 20.02; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.5%; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.1% per year; rating input score 100; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -2% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.7% per year; rating input score 100; 27th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 83.4% of revenue deployed · 78.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 17 of 17 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $6.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $251K · 22 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $481K reported
  • Consistency: 35 of 35 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 9 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 7 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 23/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 47/100.