Laura Winn Smith Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
832383716
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2018–2023
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2023
Location
Vienna, VA, USA
Phone
7038634587
Rating
92
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and Fund Distribution

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,491
Expenses
$487
Assets
$2,796

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

2 people listed

People named in this filing

  • CHRISTOPHER FINN (Executive Dir.)
  • ERIC ROBERTSON (Executive Dir.)

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 2023. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The Laura Winn Smith Foundation has been formed to provide resources to physicians and other charitable organizations focused on cancer research, fighting cancer and working with cancer patients; also raising public awareness emphasizing how diet, nutrition and a healthy lifestyle can reduce cancer risk.

What it reported doing in 2023

Our nonprofit hosts an annual golf tournament with the primary purpose of raising funds to support cancer research, patient care, and advocacy efforts. Through this event, we aim to make a meaningful impact in the fight against cancer by providing financial assistance to organizations dedicated to advancing cancer treatments, supporting patients and their families, and promoting awareness and prevention initiatives.

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filed totals do not add up and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 100
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 78
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 80.4%; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.74; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.5% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 17.5% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 34.7% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $8K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 2 people listed
  • Consistency: 5 of 6 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2018 to 2023
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III program expenses within total did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.