District of Columbia Cancer Consortium

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
521653537
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2011
Forms available
Form 990 2011
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2028211920
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Alliance/Advocacy Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$5,058,606
Expenses
$4,600,010
Assets
$4,844,064
Liabilities
$3,368,246

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2011. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2011. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The DC Cancer Consortium works to reduce cancer incidence and mortality, reduce racial and ethnic disparities in cancer treatment, and improve the quality of life of cancer survivors in the District of Columbia.

What it reported doing in 2011

The District of Columbia Cancer Consortium is a 501(C) (3) corporation in the District of Columbia, dedicated to reducing the incidence of cancer in the District of Columbia through education, early detection, improved treatment and research. DCCC is affiliated with more than 75 organizations, ranging from cancer centers to community-based healthcare and advocacy organizations. Through the District's Community Access to Health Care Amendment of 2006, the District charged the Consortium with creating and implementing a comprehensive cancer prevention program. This action resulted in the crafting of the 2005-2010 DC Cancer Control Plan (http://www.dccancerconsortium.org/cancerplan/index.html). Plan implementation funding has been held by the DC Department of Health (DC DOH), the city's designated public health agency, and is requested periodically by the Consortium, subject to the terms and conditions of the original award.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 95% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 55
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 70th 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; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 9.1%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.05; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.7; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.1%; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 60.1% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 112.7% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $3.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $144K · 8 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 4 contractors listed
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2010 to 2011
  • Money network: 15 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 16 filed related-organization links
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Whistleblower policy not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 47/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 19/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 37/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.