Hirshberg Foundation for Pancreatic Cancer Research

Legal name: Hirshberg Foundation for Pancreatic Canc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
954640311
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-PF 2012
Location
Los Angeles, CA, US
Phone
(310) 473-5121
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Private Grantmaking Foundations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,786,197
Expenses
$3,081,348
Assets
$3,383,563
Liabilities
$262,471

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LISA MANHEIM (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, DIRECTOR)
  • AGNES BERLINER HIRSHBERG (DIRECTOR, PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • LISA MANHEIM (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, DIRECTOR): $275,003 total reported compensation
  • AGNES BERLINER HIRSHBERG (DIRECTOR, PRESIDENT): $6,356 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To find a cure for pancreatic cancer in honor of Ron Hirshberg and the thousands of people who are diagnosed with this disease each year.

What it reported doing in 2024

The research programs include various grants and commitments to further research into finding a cure for pancreatic cancer. Through our seed grant program we support basic and clinical scientists and investigators in the u.s. And abroad, awarding more than 130 grants since 2005 and funding more than 50 medical research institutions globally. The ucla agi hirshberg center for pancreatic diseases provides a critical hub for advancing research and treatment breakthroughs. We fund 3 laboratories at ucla focusing on basic and translational science. We fund a pancreas tissue bank.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 97% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 73% 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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 73
  • Transparency & Controls: 83
  • Accountability: 92
  • Sustainability: 29
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 84.8%; rating input score 85
  • Program expense ratio: 70.2%; rating input score 70
  • Fundraising efficiency: $6.46 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 17th 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: -10.6%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.1; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.08; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9.1%; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.1% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.2% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 1 programs and campaigns described on the official site
  • Where the money goes: 84.8% of revenue deployed · 70.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 7 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $2.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $275K · 7 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 16 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 14 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 24/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 13/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 40/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 33/100.