Mary Bird Perkins Cancer Center Foundation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 202046461
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
- Location
- Baton Rouge, LA, USA
- Phone
- 2252151223
- Rating
- 74
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Standard
- Sector
- Single Organization Support
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $2,842,517
- Expenses
- $1,173,492
- Assets
- $40,327,916
- Liabilities
- $837,280
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
21 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JONAS FONTENOT (PRESIDENT/CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- JONAS FONTENOT (PRESIDENT/CEO): $807,407 total reported compensation
- DANIELLE MACK (VP CHIEF PHILANTRHOPY OFFICER): $245,924 total reported compensation
- ELEANOR CARTER STONE (SENIOR DIRECTOR OF PHILANTHROPY): $169,091 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 build a long-term sustainable endowment fund and provide for the stewardship of such funds in order to help fight cancer in the communities served by the center. The foundation may also provide support to other non-profit organizations located in the geographic areas served by the center, which have demonstrated the ability to conduct cancer-related programs or services that reduce cancer incidence and mortality, or improve the quality of life for thoseaffected by cancer.
What it reported doing in 2024
Foundation board-approved grant funding to benefit the mission and patient care activities of the center in the areas it serves.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 65% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 63
- Transparency & Controls: 69
- Accountability: 96
- Sustainability: 85
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 50.9%; rating input score 51
- Program expense ratio: 88.3%; rating input score 88
- Fundraising efficiency: $15.52 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Missing
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 99.8%; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: No; rating input score 0
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 24th 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: 58.7%; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 34.37; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 11.9%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 15.8% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 12.2% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 12.5% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 50.9% of revenue deployed · 88.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 14 of 15 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $807K · 21 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 20 of 21 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 5 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.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 51/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 52/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 25/100.