Rio Grande Cancer Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237105159
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
El Paso, TX, USA
Phone
9155627660
Rating
86
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,642,928
Expenses
$990,495
Assets
$15,533,217
Liabilities
$50,024

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • RICHARD MILLER (President)
  • PENNY NEVAREZ (Vice President)
  • GILBERT SANCHEZ (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • CAROL BOHLE (EXECUTIVE DIR.): $115,611 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To reduce the human and economic effect of cancer on the citizens of el paso county through the financial support and development of effective programs for advocacy, education, early detection, and other services to cancer patients and their families.

What it reported doing in 2025

COLLECTIVE PROGRAMS: The Classroom Series offers ongoing education about treatment, coping, exercise, nutrition, grief support and cancer specific support groups and are held regularly throughout the year. Average attendance at the weekly events is about 15 people per class. Special programming toward male health awareness consists of messaging about male specific cancers and how to prevent and manage a diagnosis. The Foundation hosts a separate site, good2know.org, focused on education, prevention, and early detection. cancerhelpcenter.org, formerly rgcf.org, provides information on public services, support, events, appointments, and information for newly diagnosed cancer patients. Social media posts are managed on the foundation's webpage, facebook page, instagram site, and email newsletters which are updated with weekly content.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 65% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 79% for direct work, and 21% for 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: 84
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 80
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 77%; rating input score 77
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4.74 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 73.2%; rating input score 73; 37th 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: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 39.7%; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 15.68; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 11.7%; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.9% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.3% per year; rating input score 100; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.9% per year; rating input score 100; 22nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 77% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $763K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $116K · 16 people listed
  • Consistency: 37 of 38 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 33/100.