Melanoma Know More

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
260505222
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2012
Location
Cincinnati, OH, USA
Phone
5139467130
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Cancer

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$197,552
Expenses
$203,169
Assets
$196,777
Liabilities
$11,568

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

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Andy Kaminski (Immediate Past President)
  • Carolyn Taggart Caress (Vice President & Treasurer)
  • Richard Roebuck (President)
  • Rene McPHedran (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Rene McPHedran (Executive Director): $91,975 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Melanoma Know More strives to reduce the impact of melanoma through awareness, education, support of medical research, and assistance to persons affected by melanoma.

What it reported doing in 2025

Free Monthly Skin Cancer Screening Clinics: On the second Saturday of every month from 10am - noon, a cancer screening clinic is scheduled and supported by dermatologists, nurses, and administrative staff, who volunteer their time to detect skin cancer, specifically melanoma. If one of the volunteer dermatologists notes a suspicious finding that could potentially be a melanoma, the patient is expedited within four weeks from the clinic date to a dermatologist for further evaluation and a possible biopsy. Melanoma Know More is the only organization in the US to provide such consistent screenings. A new clinic was added for Grant County, KY, expanding the service area. And hosting a clinic for First Responders was continued from the previous year. In 2025, Melanoma Know More provided 9 free skin cancer screening clinics, 438 patients were screened during the year.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 71% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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 - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 48
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 29
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 53.8%; rating input score 54
  • Program expense ratio: 51.3%; rating input score 51
  • Fundraising efficiency: $2.8 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 12; 12th 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: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • 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: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -2.8%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.97; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 45.3%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.5% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.6% per year; rating input score 0; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -5.8% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 53.8% of revenue deployed · 51.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $104K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $92K · 17 people listed
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2013 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 54/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 51/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 12/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 29/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 40/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 4/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 26/100.