Christina Carinato Charitable Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
815281893
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2017–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2021
Location
Western Springs, IL, USA
Phone
3126365078
Rating
98
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and/or Fund Distribution

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$68,554
Expenses
$58,966
Assets
$73,229
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MATTHEW CARINATO (PRESIDENT)
  • C ALYCE ANDRES FRANZ (VICE-PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • MATTHEW CARINATO (PRESIDENT)
  • GINA GUILFOYLE (SECREATARY)
  • KIMBERLY G KOSANOVICH (TREASURER)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

To provide continuing financial and other support to medical research and other similar institutions for scientific and clinical research regarding female reproductive cancers and breast cancer, and the causes, the treatment, and the ultimate cure of these diseases.

What it reported doing in 2024

Donation to woman's reproductive cancer health research and treatment.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filed totals do not add up and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 100
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 61
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 14%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.24; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 22.2% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.1% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.3% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $94K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2017 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III program expenses within total did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 52/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.