Healing Pathways Cancer Resource Center

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
262173633
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2016, Form 990-EZ 2012, Form 990-N 2010
Location
Rockford, IL, USA
Phone
8154845604
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Libraries

Reported finances

Revenue
$49,226
Expenses
$151,506
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KATHLEEN SIEDENBURG (1ST VIC PRESIDENT)
  • MELODY ROCCAFORTE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • MELODY ROCCAFORTE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $54,113 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Healing pathways is an independent organization committed to offering free supportive services to those touched by cancer. Through education, inspiration, and complementary therapies, we encourage individuals to discover their own healing pathway.

What it reported doing in 2016

Massage, qigong/tai chi and yoga classes. No charge therapeutic massage provided by a licensed massage therapist. Yoga classes are designed to improve physical health, promote relaxation and flexibility, and support recovery. Qigong/tai chi classes combine specific postures, slow graceful movements and controlled breathing techniques to increase energy, reduce stress and promote the body's immune system. All instructors donated their time to the organization in 2016.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 73% for direct work, and 27% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 77
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 7
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 54.9%; rating input score 55
  • Fundraising efficiency: $2.35 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 79th 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: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -207.8%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 35.7%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -6.3% per year; rating input score 0; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -25.7% per year; rating input score 0; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -25.8% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 54.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $83K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $54K · 17 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2013 to 2016
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.

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 — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 55/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 25/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 11/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 9/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.