Institute for Myeloma & Bone Cancer Research

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
460475333
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
West Hollywood, CA, USA
Phone
3106231210
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Health

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,611,847
Expenses
$1,474,134
Assets
$1,999,099
Liabilities
$3,423,529

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JAMES R BERENSON MD (PRESIDENT AN)

People named in this filing

  • JAMES R BERENSON MD (PRESIDENT AN)
  • GEO HARTLEY ESQ (VICE PRESIDE)
  • SHAHROOZ ESHAGHIAN MD (SECRETARY)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

Form 990 part iii line 1 the institute for myeloma and bone cancer reserach is established for the following purposes: (i) to promote research in to the causes of myeloma, bone cancer, and related disorders, (ii)to support the development of therapies designed to treat and control myeloma, bone cancer, and related disorders, and (iii) to advance efforts directed at preventing the development of myeloma, bone cancer, and related disorders, including the treatment of persons having such diseases. The institute's two major activities will be (1) research related to the causes of myeloma and related disorders and (2) development of therapies to prevent and treat myeloma and related disorders.

What it reported doing in 2025

Achieved advancements in the research and cure for myeloma. Research has helped cure or reduce the occurrence of myeloma in humans.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 73% 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 43
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 50
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 43.2%; rating input score 43
  • Program expense ratio: 47.2%; rating input score 47
  • Fundraising efficiency: $8.44 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • 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: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 8.5%; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.36; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.71; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -4.8% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.7% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 16% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 43.2% of revenue deployed · 47.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $696K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 3 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 43/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 47/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 29/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 53/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 52/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 2/100.