Desert Cancer Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
330648823
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Palm Desert, CA, USA
Phone
7607726554
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Health Support Services

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,285,723
Expenses
$808,218
Assets
$2,176,219
Liabilities
$64,939

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

Leadership & pay

19 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MARK T SCHEIBACH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • DEBRA PICKETT (PRESIDENT)
  • RICHARD WEINTRAUB (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • MARK T SCHEIBACH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $149,887 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Dcf provides financial assistance for cancer screening, diagnosis, treatment and navigation services to local residents who are uninsured, underinsured, or lack necessary funds to cover the high cost of cancer care services.

What it reported doing in 2025

For 2025 year-end, dcf provides financial assistance for 165 patients. Assistance includes cancer screening, diagnosis, treatment and navigation services to local residents who are uninsured, underinsured, or lack necessary funds to cover the high cost of cancer care services. For individuals living at or below the federal poverty level (fpl), dcf helps alleviate the financial burden entirely! By providing financial assistance for vital cancer care, dcf ensures that all patients will have immediate access to healthcare and treatment. Dcf directly pays insurance premiums, deductibles, co- pays, co-insurance, and medical-cal share of cost. The costs cover various treatments such as chemo infusions, radiation therapies, biopsies, prescription medications, x- rays, diagnostic scans, and prescription medications related to cancer and allied diseases.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 94% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 48% for direct work, and 52% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 67
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 70
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 57.3%; rating input score 57
  • Program expense ratio: 83.2%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: $39.34 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 71; 71st 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; 78th 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; 64th 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: 37.1%; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.69; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 18.5%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.5% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.9% per year; rating input score 100; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.9% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 57.3% of revenue deployed · 83.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 18 of 18 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $673K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $150K · 19 people listed
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2014 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 57/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 18/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 49/100.