Charlotte Maxwell Clinic

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
943116456
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Oakland, CA, USA
Phone
5106017660
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$517,305
Expenses
$1,149,188
Assets
$2,048,861
Liabilities
$87,795

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Melbra Watts (Director): $63,998 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To provide San Francisco Bay Area low-income women with cancer the opportunity for improved health outcomes and quality of life by providing free access to compassionate, integrative care and wrap-around support.

What it reported doing in 2025

The Charlotte Maxwell Clinic CMC provides free integrative health care to low-income women with cancer in the San Francisco Bay Area. The clinic focuses on supporting women who are undergoing or recovering from cancer treatment by offering a range of complementary therapies such as acupuncture, massage therapy, herbal medicine, homeopathy, guided imagery, and nutritional counseling to help manage side effects and improve clients' quality of life. The clinic serves women who are low-income, uninsured, or underinsured, many of whom are from communities of color or immigrant backgrounds. Services are provided at no cost, helping to reduce healthcare disparities. Beyond medical care, the Charlotte Maxwell Clinic fosters a safe and nurturing space where clients can feel seen, supported, and empowered during their cancer journey. In 2025, CMC served 295 unduplicated clients, offered 2,892 in-clinic and telehealth visits, and conducted 33 educational and integrative group workshops

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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

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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 29
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 73%; rating input score 73
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4.13 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 13; 13th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -122.1%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.78; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.6%; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.3% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.8% per year; rating input score 100; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 14.1% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 73% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $839K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $64K · 11 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $109K reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 13/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 45/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 49/100.