Southern California Genitourinary Cancer Research Collaborative

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
862841642
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2022–2022
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2022, Form 990-N 2021
Location
Fullerton, CA, USA
Phone
9492935759
Rating
87
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Professional Societies, Associations

Reported finances

Revenue
$107,500
Expenses
$132,500
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SHAILEY PATEL-SEE PART III LINE 28 (BOARD MEMBER, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

People named in this filing

  • SHAILEY PATEL-SEE PART III LINE 28 (BOARD MEMBER, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • JOANN HSU- SEE PART III LINE 28 (BOARD MEMBER, PROGRAM MANAGER)
  • SUMANTA PAL (BOARD MEMBER, FOUNDER)

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

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Southern California genitourinary cancer research collaborative (scgcrc) purpose was to promote and foster collaboration and improve patient care among clinical and translational researchers in southern California focused on genitourinary cancers. We intended to accomplish this by creating the first consortium for genitourinary cancer research physicians and research clinicians allowing them to collaborate and discuss trends in the industry and identify areas for collaboration.

What it reported doing in 2022

Scgcrc held two board meetings in 2022. The first meeting was productive and we discussed various ways to collaborate as we emerged in a post-covid world. We received an educational presentation from board members and the team begin to collaborate on different ways to share and discuss data across multiple institutions. .about mid-year we determined that scgcrc could be better served and have a more dynamic future if we brought our resources and aligned with city of hope. The board voted to dissolve late in the year and distribute all remaining assets (after paying off all known debts and obligations) to city of hope. Substantially all remaining assets were distributed by end of february 2023. See schedule n for more details. .note that compensation paid to the executive director and program manager includes services provided both in 2021 and 2022.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 74% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 93
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 5
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 81.5%; rating input score 81

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -23.3%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 31.7%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

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

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 81.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $108K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 7/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 11/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is recorded as not currently operating in California.