Randy Shaver Cancer Research and Community Fund

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
270476510
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Minnetonka, MN, USA
Phone
9524731780
Rating
87
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and/or Fund Distribution

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,402,656
Expenses
$1,510,453
Assets
$254,416
Liabilities
$52,000

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

Leadership & pay

23 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • RANDY SHAVER (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • ROSEANN GIOVANATTO-SHAVER (EXECUTIVE DI): $21,100 total reported compensation
  • RANDY SHAVER (PRESIDENT): $1,850 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The mission of the organization is to support the cancer community in Minnesota by funding research, prevention, treatment and community outreach programs relating to cancer.

What it reported doing in 2025

The randy shaver cancer research and community fund supports the cancer community in Minnesota by funding research, prevention, treatment and community outreach programs relating to cancer. What makes this fund so unique is that a nominal amount of the monies raised are spent on administrative costs, making it one of the most efficient uses of charitable donations. Grants given are spent on technology and tools that enhance early detection of cancer, new programs promoting research to help prevent cancer relapses, projects that demonstrate research in the area of cancer, and programs that enhance the lives of Minnesota's cancer community by providing aid and assistance. See the 990, schedule i for the full list of amounts given. Fundraising events for the year included: rush for the cure golf and gala, tackle cancer, shaver specials at rock elm tavern and big bore barbeque, carps cancer crushers - cribbage tournament and golf tournament, take down cancer events, shoot out cancer hockey events, strike out cancer events, pickleball tournament, and other small events.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 99% 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.
  • 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 fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 93
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 19
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 93.1%; rating input score 93
  • Fundraising efficiency: $18.86 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 99.6%; rating input score 100; 53rd 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 9 controls in place; rating input score 56
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -7.7%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.17; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.2; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.5%; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.5% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -4.1% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 93.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 23 of 23 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $21K · 23 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 10 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 8 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 9 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 54/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 15/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 9/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 25/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 55/100.