Cancer Research Foundation
Legal name: Cancer Research Foundation - Chicago Chapter
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 812771469
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2017–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Jul 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2016
- Location
- Chicago, IL, United States
- Phone
- 312.630.0055
- Rating
- 87
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Health
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,547,723
- Expenses
- $1,742,561
- Assets
- $1,279,229
- Liabilities
- $231,079
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
10 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- MR M LOCKE (PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- MRS A NIKITAS (CHAIRMAN/ PROGRAM DIRECTOR): $63,000 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 Research Foundation funds early-career cancer scientists and new directions in cancer science research, with the goal of contributing to “Transformational Events” in the prevention, treatment, and cure for cancer. At the age of 26, Dr. Charles Huggins became one of the original faculty members at the University of Chicago School of Medicine when it opened in 1927. Dr. Huggins intended to become a surgeon. Instead, early in his career, he was seduced by the excitement of scientific discovery, fascinated by his “Queen of the Sciences,” urology. In the 1940s and 50s, Dr. Huggins received support from the Cancer Research Foundation. Huggins became one of the giants of the University of Chicago medical faculty, the leading urologist of his day. In 1966, Dr. Huggins was awarded the Nobel Prize for Medicine and Physiology for his discovery of a new principal, hormonal...
What it reported doing in 2024
Grants to scientists at university medical centers for clinical and laboratory research on various projects
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 96% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 78% 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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 91
- Transparency & Controls: 94
- Accountability: 78
- Sustainability: 27
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 88.9%; rating input score 89
- Fundraising efficiency: $17.51 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -12.6%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.73; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.18; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 3.6%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 34.6% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 29% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 39.4% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 2 programs and campaigns described on the official site
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 88.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 8 of 9 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.5M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $63K · 10 people listed
- Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 7 filing years from 2017 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 2 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.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 14/100.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 55/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 33/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 33/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.