Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
391554806
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Milwaukee, WI, USA
Phone
4142712456
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$12,836,586
Expenses
$14,136,449
Assets
$21,858,862
Liabilities
$1,553,613

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LEISHA EMENS MD PHD (PRESIDENT)
  • JAMES GULLEY MD PHD (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • JENNIFER GUERRIERO PHD (DIRECTOR): $2,000 total reported compensation
  • TULLIA BRUNO PHD (DIRECTOR): $2,000 total reported compensation
  • CRYSTAL PAULOS PHD (DIRECTOR): $1,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To improve cancer patient outcomes by advancing the science, development and application of cancer immunology and immunotherapy through our core values of interaction/integration, innovation, translation, diversity and inclusion and leadership in the field. Sitc aims to make cancer immunotherapy a standard of care and the word "cure" a reality for cancer patients everywhere.

What it reported doing in 2024

Cig program - the sitc cancer immunotherapy guidelines program is a collection of clinical practice guidelines (cpgs) developed by multi-disciplinary panels of experts who draw from their own practical experience as well as evidence in the published literature and clinical trial data to develop evidence- and consensus-based recommendations on when and how to use immunotherapy to help improve outcomes for patients with cancer. These cpgs offer a vital resource for the practicing oncology community. Sitc uses as a model the institute of medicine's 2011 "standards for developing trustworthy clinical practice guidelines" to ensure a fair, transparent and balanced process for creating the cpgs. Each cpg expert panel is comprised of a comprehensive mix of academic physicians and researchers, nurses, patients, and patient advocates invited from institutions across the united states.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 75% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 92% 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 72
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 40
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 93.4%; rating input score 93
  • Program expense ratio: 84.6%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: $43.33 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Limited
    • Requires narrative reports: Limited
    • Conducts field audits: Limited
    • May suspend future funding: Limited
    • Requires financial reports: Limited
    • Conducts site visits: Limited
    • Requires grant agreements: Limited
    • May require repayment: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 95.5%; rating input score 96; 25th 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; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: -10.1%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.55; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.07; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.3% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.5% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.4% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 93.4% of revenue deployed · 84.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 7 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $12M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $2K · 13 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $6.9M reported
  • Consistency: 35 of 36 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and grants
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 12 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 9 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 10/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 52/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.