Pink Tractor Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
465654524
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2021, Form 990-N 2015
Location
St Charles, IA, USA
Phone
5152406517
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Voluntary Health Associations & Medical Disciplines N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue
$194,104
Expenses
$190,609
Assets
$300,764
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • REBECCA A BROMMEL (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • REBECCA A BROMMEL (PRESIDENT)
  • SARA L HOBART (SECRETARY/TREASURER)
  • THOMAS W BROMMEL (DIRECTOR)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Research, detection, prevention, and treatment of cancer, including but not limited to breast cancer, with focus on cancer patients and cancer survivors located in central Iowa. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the corporation is organized and operated exclusively for charitable, religious, educational, and scientific purposes within the meaning of sections 501(c)(3) and 170(c)(2)(b) of the internal revenue code of 1986, as amended (or corresponding section of any future federal tax code) (the "code"), including, for such purposes, the making of distributions to organizations that qualify as exempt organizations under section 501(c)(3) of the code.

What it reported doing in 2025

Provided financial support to 148 individuals with a cancer diagnosis to help relieve financial burden associated with cancer treatments and related expenses (i.e., medical bills and co-pays, travel expenses for obtaining treatment, monthly bills due to inability to work, etc.)

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 91% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 98% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • 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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 85
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 51
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 98.6%; rating input score 99
  • Program expense ratio: 99.1%; rating input score 99
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 84.6%; rating input score 85; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 99.4%; rating input score 99; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • 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: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 1.8%; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.58; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 12.4% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 15.7% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 21.5% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 98.6% of revenue deployed · 99.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $189K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 16 of 18 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2022 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 40/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 53/100.