Seattle Cancer Care Alliance House

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
260443505
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2009
Forms available
Form 990 2009
Location
Seattle, WA, USA
Phone
2062881000
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Health

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$636,624
Expenses
$2,745,301
Assets
$26,825,102
Liabilities
$26,681,362

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2009. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

20 people listed

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2009. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Seattle cancer care alliance house (sccah) is a subsidiary of seattle cancer care alliance (scca). The purpose of sccah is the constructing, owning and operating of a facility to provide short-term housing for cancer patients receiving treatment at (see schedule o) scca and their family members who live outside the greater seattle, Washington area. Sccah also enhances scca's provision of integrated, innovative, cost effective, clinical care in the least stressful environment for patients and permits cancer patients to have the comfort and support of family members while receiving cancer treatment at scca. Sccah opened for operations in september of 2009. Scca was organized by seattle children's heathcare system, the university of Washington, and fred hutchinson cancer research center, for the purpose of developing and offering a comprehensive program of integrated cancer care services.

What it reported doing in 2009

Seattle cancer care alliance house was under construction through june 30, 2009. The facility began offering patients and their families short-term housing while receiving cancer treatments in september 2009.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 78% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 35
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 70th 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: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -331.2%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 9.77; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.99; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.5%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $497K · 20 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 4 contractors listed
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Document-retention policy not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 11/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.