Pancreatic Cancer Cure Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
815164082
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Quakertown, PA, USA
Phone
2157830502
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$89,726
Expenses
$88,179
Assets
$7,971
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ANTHONY CYGAN (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • STEPHEN CYGAN (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • MICHAEL CYGAN (DIRECTOR)
  • ANTHONY CYGAN (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • DAVID CYGAN (SECRETARY)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

Pancreatic cancer cure foundation's mission is to raise money and distribute funding primarily towards pancreatic cancer research and compassionate care initiatives, and, to a lesser extent, awareness and advocacy efforts.

What it reported doing in 2024

$34,500 in funding was provided to sidney kimmel cancer center at jefferson university, an nci-designated facility. $32,500 of that amount was specifically directed to the pancreas, biliary & related research center to support research. The supported research includes seeking improvements to early detection of pancreatic cancer and to develop more effective screening procedures. This facility is leading investigations into genetic, environmental and lifestyle links to pancreatic and related cancers, including novel approaches to individualized therapy based on molecular genetic features of tumors. The remaining $2,000 of this funding was used for jefferson's "compassionate care" initiatives supporting pancreatic cancer patients during treatment.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% 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 available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 88
  • Accountability: 18
  • Sustainability: 45
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 89.2%; rating input score 89
  • Program expense ratio: 90.7%; rating input score 91
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 95%; rating input score 95; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 10%; rating input score 10; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 1.7%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.09; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 12.8% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 11.3% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -9.4% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 89.2% of revenue deployed · 90.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 1 of 10 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $80K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 19 of 20 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2016 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 3 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.

  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 10/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 8/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 58/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.