Prevent Cancer Foundation Aka Cancer Research & Prevention Fndn

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
521429544
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Alexandria, VA, USA
Phone
7038364412
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Health

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$10,018,961
Expenses
$8,719,694
Assets
$23,449,352
Liabilities
$5,358,148

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

Leadership & pay

31 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Jody Hoyos (Chief Executive Officer)

Highest reported compensation

  • Jody Hoyos (Chief Executive Officer): $362,187 total reported compensation
  • Jennifer Niyangoda (VP, Development & Marketin): $234,519 total reported compensation
  • Amy Sokal Khalaf (Managing Director, Finance): $162,800 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Prevent Cancer Foundation's mission is to empower people to stay ahead of cancer through prevention and early detection. We carry out our mission in four key ways: support of cancer prevention and early detection research, education, outreach, and advocacy.

What it reported doing in 2025

Educating people about how they can prevent cancer and detect it early through healthy lifestyle choices and routine medical screenings. The Foundation holds several educational conferences for professionals in the cancer field. We educate the public about cancer screenings and cancer prevention through online resources, easy-to-understand messaging on our website and social media platforms, national media, and more. The Foundation's Guide to Preventing Cancer outlines the nine cancers the Foundation focuses on (+ viruses and cancer), and includes symptoms, risk factors, ways to reduce risk, and screening methods.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 94% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 68% for direct work, and 32% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 64
  • Transparency & Controls: 69
  • Accountability: 98
  • Sustainability: 55
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 71.1%; rating input score 71
  • Program expense ratio: 69.4%; rating input score 69
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5.46 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 89.5%; rating input score 89; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 89.7%; rating input score 90; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 95.8%; rating input score 96; 25th 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: 13%; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.69; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.23; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 16.9%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.5% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.7% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.4% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 71.1% of revenue deployed · 69.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 23 of 24 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $6.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $362K · 31 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 4 contractors listed · $1.7M reported
  • Consistency: 39 of 41 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 30 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 22 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 15/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 9/100.
  • 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.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 48/100.