Purple Pansies Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 812691997
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2017–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Cumming, GA, USA
- Rating
- 85
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Support N.E.C.
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $736,195
- Expenses
- $683,251
- Assets
- $439,754
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
5 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Maria Fundora (President)
- Jose Fundora (Vice President)
People named in this filing
- Maria Fundora (President)
- Jose Fundora (Vice President)
- Jana Bledsoe (Treasurer)
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
To offer financial aid to individuals and families affected by pancreatic cancer, scholarships for students of these families, while funding research and clinical trials.
What it reported doing in 2025
Through our emergency grant application process, we help families in the United States battling pancreatic cancer and that are struggling with financing, such as housing, medication, gas, food, transportation. If there is something else, they need to thrive and relieve some of their anxiety and focus on their care, we will try to help. Through our scholarship application process, we award scholarships to children of families suffering with this cancer or if the student has an immediate family member who has passed. We do this to ease the burden this has placed on the children. The only way to end pancreatic cancer is through increased funding of research, early detection and clinical trials. We have helped fund 3 drugs currently used as standard of care for pancreas cancer as well as to fund other trials in the US.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Other-operating. 90% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 91% of its reported program spending out as grants.
The verdict
STRONG - 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 83
- Transparency & Controls: 89
- Accountability: 88
- Sustainability: 52
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 88.7%; rating input score 89
- Program expense ratio: 95.5%; rating input score 96
- Fundraising efficiency: $4.77 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 18th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 78th 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: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- 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: 7.2%; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.64; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 14.6% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 9.9% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 14.1% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 88.7% of revenue deployed · 95.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $653K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
- Consistency: 21 of 22 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 8 filing years from 2017 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 2 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 15/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
- Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 50/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 31/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.