Lowcountry Ovarian Cancer Alliance

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
990575220
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2024–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
Daniel Island, SC, USA
Phone
6303022323
Rating
57
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Health

Reported finances

Revenue
$50,178
Expenses
$23,620
Assets
$79,100
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SUE SOMMER-KRESSE PHD (PRESIDENT)
  • SHARKEA HICKS (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • SUE SOMMER-KRESSE PHD (PRESIDENT)
  • SHARKEA HICKS (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • Lea Austen (Secretary)

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

To educate and create awareness of gynecologic cancers. To support survivors, families and caregivers. To encourage research to find a test and cure for these deadly diseases.

What it reported doing in 2025

Teal totes: goal is to give every newly diagnosed woman with a gynecologic cancer in the lowcountry with a bag of hope (teal tote). The bag contains items needed during the required intense treatments; warm blanket, hats to use when hair is lost, water bottle, journal, etc (approx. Cost of $100 each). In 2024 $11,295 was spent for teal totes. Totes were distributed to 125 newly diagnosed women through area cancer center and gynecologic oncologists' offices.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 65% for direct work, and 35% for grants.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 39
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 80
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 27.5%; rating input score 27
  • Program expense ratio: 60.5%; rating input score 60

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 52.9%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.35; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -23.8% per year; rating input score 0; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -42.8% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 40.3% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 27.5% of revenue deployed · 60.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 4 filed program accomplishments · $14K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 18 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2024 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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 27/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.