South Lake Tahoe Cancer League

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
680050503
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
South Lake Tahoe, CA, USA
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Health Support Services

Reported finances

Revenue
$57,179
Expenses
$176,129
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LaDonna Childress (President)
  • Brian Gault (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • LaDonna Childress (President)
  • Brian Gault (Vice President)
  • Erika Gonzales (Treasurer)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

Cancer patient assistance

What it reported doing in 2025

Provide transportation to appointments and financial assistance to cancer patients.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 60% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 52% for direct work, and 48% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 78
  • Transparency & Controls: 93
  • Accountability: 30
  • Sustainability: 13
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 51.1%; rating input score 51
  • Fundraising efficiency: $8.66 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -208%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.2% per year; rating input score 0; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -5.8% per year; rating input score 0; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -6.4% per year; rating input score 0; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 51.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 10 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $90K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 18 of 18 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2011 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 51/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 11/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 50/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 3/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is recorded as not currently operating in California.