Sickle Cell Disease Foundation of California

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
956155962
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Ontario, CA, USA
Phone
7604975440
Rating
64
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Cancer

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,949,385
Expenses
$3,106,319
Assets
$1,326,850
Liabilities
$503,677

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Mary Brown (President and CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • Mary Brown (President and CEO): $215,000 total reported compensation
  • Deborah Green (Director Health Education): $110,000 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 build a world where individuals with Sickle Cell Disease get the care and compassion they deserve.

What it reported doing in 2025

Networking California for Sickle Cell Care NCSCC - 2025 Program Accomplishments. In 2025 the Sickle Cell Disease Foundation SCDF in partnership with the Center for Inherited Blood Disorders CIBD continued to co-manage the Networking California for Sickle Cell Care NCSCC a statewide initiative designed to improve access to comprehensive care for adults living with sickle cell disease. The program supported a network of 12 multidisciplinary specialty clinics providing coordinated medical care Community Health Worker CHW services care coordination patient and family education behavioral health support and connections to community resources. During the year SCDF provided leadership in Community Health Worker for workforce development patient navigation community engagement performance monitoring data collection and statewide collaboration among clinical and community partners. The program continued to improve access to knowledgeable providers strengthen care coordination and reduce barriers to care while advancing sustainable reimbursement for CHW services through Californias Enhanced Care Management ECM program. These activities furthered the Foundations charitable mission of improving health outcomes and quality of life for individuals and families affected by sickle cell disease throughout California.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 61% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 94
  • Transparency & Controls: 55
  • Accountability: 37
  • Sustainability: 13
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 85.2%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: $148.52 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 15th 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 6th 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: 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: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -59.3%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.43; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.38; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.5%; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.5% per year; rating input score 100; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -15.2% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -9.8% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 85.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 12 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $2.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $215K · 16 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 42 of 43 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2020 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.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 21/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 16/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 36/100.