The Canary Fund Dba Canary Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
651230251
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Woodside, CA, USA
Phone
6506463200
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public Foundations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,205,595
Expenses
$2,185,417
Assets
$2,450,031
Liabilities
$707,828

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Don Listwin (Founder & CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • Heidi Auman (Program Manager): $201,750 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Canary Foundation is a public charity exempt from U.S. federal income tax under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code in the United States. Canary Foundation of Canada is a Public Foundation registered with the Canada Revenue Agency; Business Number 82906 8550 RROOO1.The Canary Foundation has assembled teams of cancer researchers recognized by their peers as leaders in their disciplines from across multiple institutions and disciplines to attack the problem of early detection in a new, collaborative, action-oriented manner with the foremost objective of translating research into clinical applications. Canary differentiators include: * Dedication to early detection * Leaders in collaborative science * Focused and managed research * Best-in-class talent * 100% of donations goes to researchOne of the first decisions the Science Team made was to choose ovarian cancer as a prototype for creating an early detection blood test to detect trace amounts of proteins called biomarkers pro

What it reported doing in 2025

Canary Prostate Cancer Program: The specific goals of the Canary Foundation Prostate program are to develop tests that can: 1) Identify lethal prostate cancers at an early (curable) stage; 2) Classify prostate cancers as either 1) potentially lethal; best treated with aggressive therapy b) non-lethal: suitable for continued monitoring without aggressive treatment. Given the large body of published but invalidated candidate markers for prostate cancer, we are focusing our initial efforts on evaluating the performance of a selected set of promising biomarkers. Candidate biomarkers are evaluated based on their ability to detect lethal prostate cancers at an early (curable) stage and to discriminate lethal from non-lethal prostate cancer. We are considering both fluid-based and tissue-based biomarkers for prognostic applications. The Canary Prostate Active Surveillance Study (PASS) enrolls men who opt for active surveillance of their early stage prostate cancer. Men are followed closely for signs of cancer progression, donating biospecimens and clinical data for a minimum of 5 years or until receiving treatment for their disease. The biospecimens and clinical data provide a valuable resource to test promising biomarkers and predictive tools for their use in the active surveillance setting.Canary Pancreatic Cancer Program: Canary is focused on developing diagnostics with high sensitivity and specificity to detect otherwise lethal pancreatic cancers at an early stage when they can be cured through surgical resection. We anticipate that no single biomarker will be sufficient to create a test with the required sensitivity and specificity to detect pancreatic cancer early. Instead, a definitive diagnosis will rely upon combinations of biomarkers and upon blood and imaging tests used together. To this end, the Canary pancreatic cancer researchers have collaborated to discover and validate biomarkers that will provide the basis for blood and imaging tests for the early detection of pancreatic cancer. Canary Collaborations Program: Canary Foundation believes that a collaborative, coordinated approach is necessary to achieve our goals. Our multi-disciplinary, multi-institutional Early Detection Program provides a great example of this philosophy in action. Our foundation partnerships link mutual scientific expertise and entrepreneurial spirit in the hopes of advancing research in the diagnostic arena of early cancer detection. We partner with research institutions, foundations, industry and government organizations. Collaborating programs include the Canary Center at Stanford and the CRUK Cambridge Centre Early Detection Programme at the University of Cambridge in England. We provide scientific program management to make sure that all funded research activities among the scientists and clinicians at the various partner institutions are on track and that any obstacles are rapidly addressed and overcome.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 98% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 88% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - 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 program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 32
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 91.4%; rating input score 91
  • Program expense ratio: 92%; rating input score 92
  • Fundraising efficiency: $30.68 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Fail
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 75th 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; 63rd 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: 0.9%; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.12; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.29; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9.2%; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -3.8% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -9.8% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -15.8% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 91.4% of revenue deployed · 92% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 7 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $202K · 6 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 28 of 29 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 13 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 12 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

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

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 30/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 37/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 27/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 36/100.