Edith Sanford Breast Cancer Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
450404126
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2017
Forms available
Form 990 2017
Location
Sioux Falls, SD, USA
Phone
6053126700
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,443,405
Expenses
$16,340,190
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

19 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Kelby K Krabbenhoft (Sanford President & CEO)
  • Kelby K Krabbenhoft Def Comp (Sanford President & CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • Kelby K Krabbenhoft (Sanford President & CEO): $2,288,911 total reported compensation
  • Michael LeBeau MD (Trustee/Sr VP Bismarck Clinic): $1,443,682 total reported compensation
  • JoAnn L Kunkel (Chief Financial Officer): $1,063,529 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of the Edith Sanford Breast Cancer Foundation is to unlock each woman's genetic code to advance today's prevention and treatment, and end breast cancer for future generations.

What it reported doing in 2017

The Foundation is a supporting organization whose mission is to raise funds for the groundbreaking research conducted by Edith Sanford Breast Cancer Research and in collaboration with Sanford Health, the Foundation's research and patient care partner. Thanks to a transformational gift from Denny Sanford to cover operating expenses, every private contribution is directly invested in the research and patient care programs of Edith Sanford.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 67
  • Accountability: 53
  • Sustainability: 6
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 95.1%; rating input score 95
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.39 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: No; rating input score 0
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 42.9%; rating input score 43; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -1,032.1%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.8%; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 64.5% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -48.7% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -15.9% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 95.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 14 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $15.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $2.3M · 19 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2012 to 2017
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 22 filed related-organization links
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 43/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 11/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Major donor itemization scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 49/100.