Hairy Cell Leukemia Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
363327001
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
San Francisco, CA, USA
Phone
2243557201
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,112,293
Expenses
$1,502,176
Assets
$4,521,348
Liabilities
$4,398

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KEITH MARKBREITER (PRESIDENT)
  • ADI WEBER (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • MICHAEL MARGOLIN (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • ANNA LAMBERTSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • ANNA LAMBERTSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $158,940 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The hairy cell leukemia foundation is dedicated to improving outcomes for patients by advancing research into the causes and treatment of hairy cell leukemia, as well as by providing educational resources and comfort to all those affected by hairy cell leukemia.

What it reported doing in 2025

Annual conference each fall for doctors, as well as educational webinars and forums for patients throughout the year. Facilitation of regional support networks for patients. Responding to patient inquiries and referrals to hcl centers of excellence. Facilitation of scientific advisory groups and peer-to-peer doctor support. Administrative, editorial and technical support in the preparation and submission of relevant manuscripts.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 83% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 70% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 92
  • Transparency & Controls: 69
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 36
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 93.9%; rating input score 94
  • Fundraising efficiency: $16.13 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Pass
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Pass
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • 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: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: -35.1%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.01; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.6%; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 12.5% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 13.6% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 27.3% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 93.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $1.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $159K · 13 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2015 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 7 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 5 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

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.

  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 5 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 3/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 49/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 36/100.
  • Review — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization could not be resolved against the register, so the check is unfinished.