Deep South Cancer Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
465320268
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2021
Forms available
Form 990 2021
Location
Birmingham, AL, USA
Phone
2059967380
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Health

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,699
Expenses
$7,178
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2021. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Warren Smedley (President)
  • Drew Read (Executive Director)

People named in this filing

  • Leslie Ledbetter (Director)
  • Chinara Dosse (Director)
  • Darrell O'Quinn (Director)

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

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2021. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The Deep South Cancer Foundation partners with local hospitals to help individuals and families overcome the daily barriers created by cancer.

What it reported doing in 2021

The Deep South Cancer Foundation (DSCF) partners with individuals and families on a local level to overcome the daily barriers created by cancer. Through our program, we come alongside cancer patients and families to overcome the daily barriers created by cancer. We maintain strategic partnerships on the local level to provide simple and direct solutions for easy access to needed resources. These organizations are equipped to identify the local obstacles which prevent individuals from receiving treatment. By funding programs, research, and promotinng cancer prevention and awareness, our goal is to improve the quality of life for individuals, families, and communities.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 98% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 41% for direct work, and 59% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 77
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 15
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 75.6%; rating input score 76
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -166%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -17.7% per year; rating input score 0; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -21.8% per year; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -44.5% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 75.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 14 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $5K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 14 people listed
  • Consistency: 16 of 16 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2015 to 2021
  • 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.

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 14/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 3/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.