International Lung Cancer Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
843360404
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2022
Forms available
Form 990 2022
Location
Denver, CO, USA
Phone
7203252948
Rating
62
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Lung Disease

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,273,165
Expenses
$1,523,094
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DAVID PAUL CARBONE (PRESIDENT)
  • TETSUYA MITSUDOMI (PAST PRESIDENT)
  • KELLY L KAREN (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • KELLY L KAREN (CEO): $369,553 total reported compensation
  • JOHN SKADOW (CFO): $253,633 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The international lung cancer foundation aims to accelerate the pace of thoracic malignancy research, to inspire researchers to focus their careers on lung cancer, and to reduce the worldwide lung cancer mortality rate.donations from patients, caregivers, and those individuals passionate about accelerating the pace of lung cancer research, as well as from our organization and corporate partners, go directly to funding our research grants.

What it reported doing in 2022

Fellowships - provided to train next generation of lung cancer specialists. Funding for iaslc fellowship and young investigator awards provides for training of fellows and young investigators who wish to pursue a career in diagnosis, treatment, laboratory research or other aspects of thoracic malignancies.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 79% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 90% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - Most voting board members are independent and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 53
  • Transparency & Controls: 57
  • Accountability: 86
  • Sustainability: 51
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 35.6%; rating input score 36
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Pass
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 99.5%; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 64.4%; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.5%; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 24.2% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 82.4% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -100% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 35.6% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $370K · 6 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 27 of 28 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2020 to 2022
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 8 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 36/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 47/100.