John Wayne Cancer Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
462250073
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Costa Mesa, CA, USA
Phone
9496318400
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and/or Fund Distribution

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,928,184
Expenses
$1,675,331
Assets
$20,085,583
Liabilities
$219,488

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ETHAN WAYNE (CEO)
  • STACY MULDER (VICE PRESIDENT (THRU 10/2024))

Highest reported compensation

  • STACY MULDER (VICE PRESIDENT (THRU 10/2024)): $216,070 total reported compensation
  • GREGORY GRABER (FUNDRAISING DIRECTOR): $178,008 total reported compensation
  • LAUREN FRAGA (SENIOR DIRECTOR OF PROGRAM): $128,744 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 lead the fight against cancer with courage, strength and grit.

What it reported doing in 2024

Jwcf executes and supports programs for cancer prevention and education/advocacy, including: "block the blaze program." block the blaze is a youth sun safety program that teaches kids how to be safe in the sun and prevent skin cancer. It also teaches about how to identify moles and skin spots that need to be seen by a doctor. The program contributes to the California junior lifeguards, usla junior lifeguards and other organizations such as boys & girls clubs which includes donations of sunscreen and skin cancer prevention training, and other cancer education/youth skin cancer awareness.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 64% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 88% 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 total spending goes to programs and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 58
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 82
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 77%; rating input score 77
  • Program expense ratio: 44.2%; rating input score 44
  • Fundraising efficiency: $2.64 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 90.6%; rating input score 91; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 57.4%; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 11.99; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 34.2%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.1% per year; rating input score 100; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3% per year; rating input score 100; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 77% of revenue deployed · 44.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 1 of 1 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $741K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $216K · 5 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 35 of 36 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 8 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 6 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: Program expense ratio scored 44/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 7/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 4/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.