Force-facing Our Risk of Cancer Empowered Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
650927702
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Tampa, FL, USA
Phone
8662887475
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Health

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,642,483
Expenses
$3,016,322
Assets
$1,783,408
Liabilities
$18,895

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SUSAN FRIEDMAN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • WENORA JOHNSON (PRESIDENT)
  • BARBARA PFEIFFER (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)
  • JACKIE MEDINA (SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • SUSAN FRIEDMAN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $169,710 total reported compensation
  • BARBARA PFEIFFER (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $155,419 total reported compensation
  • JACKIE MEDINA (SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT): $117,357 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Force improves the lives of the millions of individuals and families facing hereditary breast, ovarian, pancreatic, prostate, colorectal and endometrial cancers. Our community includes people with a brca, atm, palb2, chek2, pten or other inherited gene mutation and those diagnosed with lynch syndrome. We accomplish this through our education, support, advocacy and research efforts.we are dedicated to providing up-to-date, expert-reviewed information and resources that help people make informed medical decisions. Our strong, supportive community of peers and professionals ensures no one must face hereditary cancer alone. Force serves as a champion, unifying the community and advocating for awareness, access to care, and better treatment and prevention options.

What it reported doing in 2025

General program- $169,130public policy- $346,271education- $565,039research- $274,657general programs includes expenses that span all programs including software and other items that run our overall program departments.public policy: force is the only national nonprofit advocating for the unique needs of people with or at increased risk of hereditary cancers. We work with medical societies and guideline committees to assure that screening and prevention guidelines are created or updated to reflect the needs of those affected by hereditary cancer. Force has unparalleled knowledge of insurance coverage and access to care and strived to improve coverage for the hereditary cancer community.education: force's education program includes the xray review of cancer research that provides reliable information on cancer research and related topics. We look behind the headlines and translate the science into plain language to help people make informed decisions. We also have an expert-reviewed database of over 200 pages of information on hereditary cancer. Force distributes thousands of educational brochures to healthcare providers, hospitals and individuals each year in english and spanish.research: our research search and enroll tool matches people with the research studies for whice they qualify. Our targeted research recruitment efforts link participants who are the backbone of clinicalresearch to studies enrolling patients. These efforts accelerate critical hereditary cancer research to improve options and health outcomes for our community. The force research advocate training program is an online course that prepares consumers to assist researchers in designing relevant and patient-centered research studies on behalf of the hereditary cancer community. The program consists of an expert-led webinar series, supplemental learning, resources and more.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 66% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 21
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 91.6%; rating input score 92
  • Program expense ratio: 79.6%; rating input score 80
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5.88 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 22nd 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: -14.1%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.59; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 14.7%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.8% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.6% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.8% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 91.6% of revenue deployed · 79.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 11 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $2.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $170K · 13 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 31 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2011 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • 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: Fundraising efficiency scored 18/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 7/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 20/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 23/100.