The Childrens Cancer Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
521319756
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Columbia, MD, USA
Phone
4435464479
Rating
64
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$840,335
Expenses
$887,704
Assets
$491,457
Liabilities
$30,922

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

Leadership & pay

19 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Tasha Museles (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Tasha Museles (President): $184,397 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The Childrens Cancer Foundation, Inc. (Organization) is a charitable, not-for-profit corporation committed to funding locally-based researchers, programs and facilities until every child is assured a healthy cancer free future. The Organization raises funds through corporate, foundation and individual giving and partners with families, community members and the medical community in the Baltimore-Washington area.

What it reported doing in 2024

The Childrens Cancer Foundation, Inc. (Organization) is a charitable, not-for-profit corporation committed to funding locally-based researchers, programs and facilities until every child is assured a healthy cancer-free future. Through corporate, foundation and individual giving, CCF partners with local hospitals and programs to advance treatments and cures for pediatric cancer.In 2024, CCF:-Granted $399,000 locally, investing in research and programs supporting kids with cancer.-Hosted a scientific symposium, convening leading pediatric oncologists who are available to collaborate on their latest research.-Celebrated over 125 local pediatric cancer patients and survivors at an annual holiday party.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 78% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 78% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 54
  • Transparency & Controls: 73
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 26
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 61.4%; rating input score 61
  • Program expense ratio: 56.6%; rating input score 57
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.56 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 98.6%; rating input score 99; 47th 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 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -5.6%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.55; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 20.8%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -2.1% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.1% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -4.9% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 61.4% of revenue deployed · 56.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 18 of 18 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $502K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $184K · 19 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 9 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 57/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 11/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 23/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 26/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 14/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 49/100.