Jill's Wish Foundation
Legal name: Jill's Wish Foundation Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 462608405
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2018–2019
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2016, Form 990-EZ 2019, Form 990-N 2013
- Location
- Florence, KY, US
- Phone
- (702) 237-9123
- Rating
- 80
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Patient Services - Entertainment, Recreation
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $79,930
- Expenses
- $56,859
- Assets
- $40,880
- Liabilities
- $2,378
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2019. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
7 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- BARTON JOSEPH CONLEY (FOUNDER-PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- JUDY NESBITT (CO-VP OF EVENTS)
- JOHN CONLEY (DIRECTOR)
- DAN DAHLEN (VP OF MARKETING & COMM)
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 2019. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The Mission of Jill's Wish is to minimize the financial hardships patients face while going through breast cancer treatment so they can focus on recovery.
What it reported doing in 2019
In 2019, jill's wish was able to grant 12 wishes to assist breast cancer patients undergoing treatment so that their financial burden during this difficult time could be lessened. Since its inception in 2013, jill's wish has granted 202 wishes totaling over $302,000. In addition to receiving contributions from generous donors, jill's wish held its annual fundraising event, the derby party, to help fund the wishes granted during 2019.
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 65% for direct work, and 35% for grants.
The verdict
STRONG - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and revenue has declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 74
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 52
- Growth: 0
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 63.8%; rating input score 64
- Program expense ratio: 89.7%; rating input score 90
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: 28.9%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.72; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 54.5%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -101.2% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -22.5% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -17.8% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 2 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 5 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 63.8% of revenue deployed · 89.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $51K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
- Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules
- Filing history: 2 filing years from 2018 to 2019
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
- 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.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 36/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 2/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 26/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.