Lung Cancer Research Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
141935776
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Philadelphia, PA, USA
Phone
2125881580
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Health

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$7,405,105
Expenses
$6,266,597
Assets
$7,529,664
Liabilities
$2,703,563

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

Leadership & pay

24 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • AUBREY RHODES (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • ANTOINETTE WOZNIAK (CHIEF SCIENTIFIC OFFICER): $259,024 total reported compensation
  • AUBREY RHODES (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $224,293 total reported compensation
  • STACEY BOWERS (SR. DIRECTOR, PARTNERSHIPS): $177,227 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of the lung cancer research foundation is to improve lung cancer outcomes by funding research for the prevention, diagnosis, treatment and cure of lung cancer.

What it reported doing in 2024

Research: each year, lcrf awards research grants to recipients around the world that demonstrate promise and ingenuity in their work. Investigators are selected from hundreds of applicants and represent some of the brightest minds committed to improving outcomes for lung cancer patients. They come from various career paths including scientists, physicians, students, and fellows, and working on a variety of innovative research projects related to lung cancer research.see schedule o for additional information.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 96% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 48% for direct work, and 52% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 69
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 51
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 69.3%; rating input score 69
  • Program expense ratio: 80.5%; rating input score 81
  • Fundraising efficiency: $8.29 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 99.8%; rating input score 100; 41st 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: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • 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: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 15.4%; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.2; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.36; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 20.3%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.7% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.9% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.1% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 69.3% of revenue deployed · 80.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 16 of 16 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $259K · 24 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $183K reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 30 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 23 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 31/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 43/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 12/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 29/100.