Sunflower Wellness
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 201794982
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2019–2019
- Forms available
- Form 990 2019
- Location
- San Francisco, CA, USA
- Phone
- 4158280375
- Rating
- 73
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Human Services N.E.C.
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $224,715
- Expenses
- $362,776
- Assets
- $182,918
- Liabilities
- $69,027
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2019. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
10 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Maria Sousa (Executive Director)
Highest reported compensation
- Regan Fedric (Program Director): $66,698 total reported compensation
- Maria Sousa (Executive Director): $57,937 total reported compensation
- Jane Clark (Program Director): $36,000 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2019. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Empower people living w/ cancer to find strength and support thru exercise. Bridge gap betw med. treatment physical activity by working w/ oncologists to bring exercise directly to patients. Use the latest cancer fitness research to set stds in field. Promote healing sense of well-being while helping clients gain control thru recovery process
What it reported doing in 2019
Fitness Club Operate gym class membership programs at multiple Bay Area gyms to provide ongoing exercise opportunities for people living with cancer. In 2018, we taught a total of 5 weekly classes. Exercise Counseling Operate Cancer-Exercise Counseling services at clinical locations from Marin County to the South Bay, including at Marin General Hospital, UCSFs Cancer Center, and the Stanford Cancer Center. We also offer free Exercise Counseling sessions at Charlotte Maxwell Clinic in Oakland, at the Shanti Project in San Francisco, and to patients at Kaiser in Marin and San Francisco, in addition to patients at other locations.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 67% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- 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 and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 72
- Transparency & Controls: 92
- Accountability: 82
- Sustainability: 12
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 91.9%; rating input score 92
- Program expense ratio: 56.9%; rating input score 57
- Fundraising efficiency: $2.94 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 13; 13th 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: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 56
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -61.4%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.5; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.38; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 44.3%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 91.9% of revenue deployed · 56.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $206K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $67K · 10 people listed
- Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 3 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.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 57/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 13/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 4/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 25/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 17/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.