The Jonsson Cancer Center Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
952242757
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Los Angeles, CA, USA
Phone
3102060675
Rating
86
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$14,178,276
Expenses
$15,804,835
Assets
$29,739,352
Liabilities
$1,280,458

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

Leadership & pay

47 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MARGARET STEELE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • MICHAEL A TEITELL MD PHD (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • MARGARET STEELE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $339,196 total reported compensation
  • MELISSA BRODY (DIRECTOR, STEWARDSHIP): $203,383 total reported compensation
  • JACQUELINE FARINA (DIRECTOR STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIP): $154,520 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 jonsson cancer center foundation is the single most important vehicle for raising private funds for cancer research at ucla and plays a key role in advancing cancer treatments and care. Please see schedule o for additional information.

What it reported doing in 2024

Donor directed grants: ucla's jonsson comprehensive cancer center (jccc) is dedicated to patient care and fundamental research on a broad variety of human cancers and to the development of new protocols for their treatment. Contributions received for the purpose of supporting donor-designated areas and/or investigators as well as research priorities identified by the jccc academic leadership are directed to projects consistent with the specified donor intent.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 95% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 93
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 40
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 88.9%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: $33.08 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd 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; 66th 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: Fail
    • 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: -11.5%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.88; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.6%; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.8% per year; rating input score 100; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.5% per year; rating input score 100; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.3% per year; rating input score 100; 45th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 88.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 42 of 42 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 8 filed program accomplishments · $14M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $339K · 47 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 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.

Key Signals

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

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 9/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: CEO compensation review process not reported.