Sarc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 861087705
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2011–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Ann Arbor, MI, USA
- Phone
- 7349307600
- Rating
- 78
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Medical Disciplines Research
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $2,089,223
- Expenses
- $2,868,975
- Assets
- $2,967,518
- Liabilities
- $192,417
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
9 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Steven Young (President & CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- Steven Young (President & CEO): $307,720 total reported compensation
- Claudia Hill (Chief Operating Officer): $186,513 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
SARC exists to provide a collaborative platform to make progress in the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of sarcoma.
What it reported doing in 2025
The Sarcoma Alliance for Research Through Collaboration is a US-based non-profit sarcoma research cooperative solely dedicated to fostering progress in the prevention and treatment of sarcoma in order to improve patient outcomes and ultimately find a cure. SARC's unique ability to promote collaboration and unity among the sarcoma research community through scientific rigor, credibility and efficiency ensures that things get done. Collaborative partnerships and continued progress generate further investment in SARC's work for the good of the patients.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 83% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.
- 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. Expenses are high relative to revenue and program spending has declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 81
- Transparency & Controls: 89
- Accountability: 88
- Sustainability: 20
- Growth: 0
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 93.9%; rating input score 94
- Program expense ratio: 67.1%; rating input score 67
- Fundraising efficiency: $21.91 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Pass
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Pass
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- 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: -37.3%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.03; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 17.2%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -9.1% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -4.9% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -10.4% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 93.9% of revenue deployed · 67.1% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 7 of 8 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.9M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $308K · 9 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2011 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
- 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.
- 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 35/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 19/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 56/100.