Drive Fore a Cure Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
462634539
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2013–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2021
Location
Hartford, WI, USA
Phone
2625737130
Rating
41
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and Fund Distribution

Reported finances

Revenue
$72,787
Expenses
$58,899
Assets
$72,298
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

People named in this filing

  • LARRY GOEMAN (DIRECTOR)
  • JOHN TAUTGES (DIRECTOR)
  • DANIEL HUCKE (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-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Drive for a cure raises funds to support physicians and their team's efforts to locally research cutting edge issues and provide treatment to patients through the section of hematologic malignancy and transplantation (blood cancers) at the medical college of Wisconsin.

What it reported doing in 2025

Drive fore a cure raises funds to support physicians and their team's efforts to locally research cutting edges issues and provide treatment to patients through the section of hematologic malignancy and transplanation (blood cancers) at the medical college of Wisconsin.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 88% 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

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

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 63
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0.4%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0.5%; rating input score 1

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 19.1%; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.23; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.6% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 28.5% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0.4% of revenue deployed · 0.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $320 in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2013 to 2025
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 1/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 53/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.