International Society for Cutaneous Lymphomas

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
320244704
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
Elgin, IL, USA
Phone
3125858941
Rating
47
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Professional Societies, Associations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$54,407
Expenses
$88,716
Assets
$259,310
Liabilities
$18,800

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

People named in this filing

  • Antonio Cozzio MD PhD (Director)
  • Jade Cury Martins MD PhD (Director)
  • Paula A Enz MD (Director)

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

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

Overview

Mission

Increase the knowledge of lymphoproliferative and related disorders of the skin; foster collaboration among clinicians, scientists and regional or national groups by being a sponsor of an international registry of cutaneous lymphomas; promote dissemination of scientific information by organizing meetings; and favor consensus about diagnosis, management and treatment of cutaneous lymphoma.

What it reported doing in 2025

The Organization hosts a website to promote communication amongst researchers and provide ready access to recently published articles or presentations on presentations on

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
No current program activity. The filing reports no program spending for the current year.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. 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: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 35
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -63.1%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.92; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.07; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.3% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.2% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.5% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 10/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 16/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.