Massachusetts Breast Cancer Coalition Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 043144053
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Franklin, MA, USA
- Phone
- 6173766222
- Rating
- 81
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $284,867
- Expenses
- $243,527
- Assets
- $567,864
- Liabilities
- $18,217
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
13 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- DR BARBARA MALKAS (PRESIDENT)
- LISA FOLEY (VICE PRESIDENT)
- CHERYL OSIMO (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- CHERYL OSIMO (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $90,821 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Massachusetts breast cancer coalition is dedicated to preventing environmental causes of breast cancer through community education, research advocacy, and changes to public policy.
What it reported doing in 2025
In 2025, Massachusetts breast cancer coalition continued to expand its local and national reach in support of the mission of preventing the environmental causes of breast cancer through community education, research advocacy, and changes to public policy.nationally, mbcc continued in its role as a community partner on two national pfas health and exposure studies. One study is funded by the national institute of environmental health sciences, and the other is funded by the centers for disease control and prevention and the agency for toxic substances and disease registry. Through these partnerships, mbcc is contributing to a broader scientific understanding of the sources of pfas exposure and potential health effects in both adults and children.mbcc partnered with both scientists and educators to translate into spanish its let's talk prevention: actions you can take environmental health education program student modules for elementary, middle, and high school students. The program consists of free, downloadable modules suitable for teachers, students, and parents/caregivers to use both in and outside of the classroom and are designed to enhance science, health, and environmental studies curriculums.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 94% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 99% 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.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 72
- Transparency & Controls: 92
- Accountability: 84
- Sustainability: 53
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 67.5%; rating input score 68
- Program expense ratio: 78.1%; rating input score 78
- Fundraising efficiency: $51.09 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 14.5%; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.33; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 37.3%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 5.8% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 2.7% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 8.1% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 67.5% of revenue deployed · 78.1% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $190K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $91K · 13 people listed
- Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 31/100.