Maple Tree Cancer Alliance
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 274113397
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2016–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2015
- Location
- Dayton, OH, USA
- Phone
- 9374778213
- Rating
- 72
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Cancer Research
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,624,801
- Expenses
- $1,832,006
- Assets
- $785,498
- Liabilities
- $105,467
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
8 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- KAREN WONDERS (CEO)
- KELLY MCCLUSKEY (PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- KAREN WONDERS (CEO): $174,549 total reported compensation
- ANDREW WONDERS (VP OF FINANCE): $57,427 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Maple tree cancer alliance is a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization dedicated to improving the quality of life of individuals afflicted with cancer. We accomplish this by offering individualized exercise training to cancer survivors at any point during the cancer care continuum. We are the only program of its kind and are recognized as national leaders in the industry. We have a solid research program to demonstrate our program effectiveness. On average, patients who participate in our exercise oncology program experience less fatigue, pain, cardiac abnormalities, anxiety, and depression than their sedentary counterparts. Further, they experience health care cost savings in the form of less er visits, shorter length of hospital stays, and fewer 30-day readmissions.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 71% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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 - 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 74
- Transparency & Controls: 65
- Accountability: 82
- Sustainability: 20
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 86.2%; rating input score 86
- Program expense ratio: 76.3%; rating input score 76
- Fundraising efficiency: $3.87 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 12th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- 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: Limited
- 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: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 56
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -12.8%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.43; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.13; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 12.7%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 21.7% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 24.2% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 22.9% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 86.2% of revenue deployed · 76.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.4M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $175K · 8 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 8 filing years from 2016 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
- 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: Fundraising efficiency scored 12/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 14/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 20/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 29/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 38/100.