The Ovarian Cancer Research Fund Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
133806788
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
2122681002
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Federated Giving Programs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$19,532,836
Expenses
$17,338,069
Assets
$42,551,929
Liabilities
$15,499,304

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

Leadership & pay

30 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MATTHEW NEAL MILLER (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • AUDRA L MORAN (PRESIDENT & CEO)
  • TRACY MOORE (VICE PRESIDENT, SUPPORT & EDUCATION)
  • CHAD RAMSEY (VICE PRESIDENT, POLICY)

Highest reported compensation

  • AUDRA L MORAN (PRESIDENT & CEO): $368,755 total reported compensation
  • JONATHAN ZEIDMAN (CHIEF DEVELOPMENT OFFICER): $245,428 total reported compensation
  • SARAH C DEFEO (CHIEF PROGRAM OFFICER): $241,025 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Ovarian cancer research alliance (ocra) is committed to preventing, developing better treatments for and ultimately curing ovarian and related gynecologic cancers through innovative research, raising awareness and ensuring the best care possible through advocacy and support for patients and families.

What it reported doing in 2025

Ovarian cancer research alliance was founded in 1994 (as the ovarian cancer research fund, inc.) and is a full-spectrum organization funding medical research, advocating on behalf of patients and providing support and resources to patients and their families.ovarian cancer is the deadliest of all gynecologic cancers and ranks fifth as the cause of cancer death in women. In 2025, there were 20,890 new cases of ovarian cancer and 12,730 deaths from the disease in the united states. The accomplishments of ocra's programs reflect our commitment to the ovarian and gynecologic cancer communities. Since 1998, ocra has awarded 457 grants for ovarian and related cancer research to physicians and scientists at 103 leading medical centers, which is an investment totaling over $137 million. Thanks to the generosity of our donors, our investigators are working on many fronts to defeat ovarian cancer. By developing innovative strategies for early detection and exploring the genetics that increase risk for ovarian cancer, we hope to save women's lives by finding the cancer early or stopping it before it even starts. Researchers are gaining insights into the many types of ovarian and related cancers to determine the origins, which may lead to more effective testing and effective immunotherapy treatment options. Furthermore, they are identifying new and better treatments to improve overall survival, prevent drug resistance, minimize side effects, preventing recurrence and metastasis and enhance patients' quality of life. In addition to ocra's established reseach grant program, ocra also continued the health equity research grants begun in 2023. These grants focus on improving health equity in the gynecologic cancer space. As part of our global gynecologic cancer consortium, made up of partners from the uk, australia and canada, ocra launched a new ai grant in 2025. The first grant was awarded in 2025 with a start date of 2026. And with the rivkin center joining ocra in 2025, the former rivkin pilot grants were added, as well. Accomplishments achieved as a result of ocra grants include: identified a molecule that could be key to improving immune response against ovarian cancer; sought to understand why certain ovarian cancer cells resist olaparib treatment, and discovered that introducing a second drug (mifepristone) while targeting certain cells (polyploid giant cancer cells) may offer a solution; identified a previously unknown chemoresistant pathway in hgsc which led to working on a new therapy to overcome this; shed new light on how the most common subtype of ovarian cancer develops and metastasizes, by identifying a key molecule that allows malignancies in the fallopian tube to migrate to the ovaries and continue to grow; uncovered several mechanisms of immune escape to help explain some ovarian cancers' resistance to immunotherapy; showed that rucaparib extends progression free survival in ovarian cancer; discovered that 18% of ovarian cancer cases involve inherited mutations; pinpointed two genes that trigger ovarian cancer; demonstrated how gene therapy may help patients with recurrent disease; discovered that analyzing data from pap smears could help detect endometrial and ovarian cancer; established there is no link between obesity and risk for the most common type of ovarian cancer; shown that fgfr4 is a prognostic marker and therapeutic target for ovarian cancer; defined similarities between some endometrial, breast and ovarian cancers; explained how an experimental drug may be helpful in fighting platinum-resistant ovarian cancer; identified biomarkers that can be used to monitor the development of platinum resistance therapies; identified novel biomarkers of hgsoc and specific drug targets; targeted mdm2 degradation as a novel treatment for ovarian cancer; used machine learning to bridge the gap between disparate data sets specifically in patients with hgsoc; dosed the first patients in the clinical trial "immunotherapy platform s

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 94% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 61% 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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 73
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 53
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 76.8%; rating input score 77
  • Program expense ratio: 81.9%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: $9.13 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Pass
    • Conducts field audits: Limited
    • May suspend future funding: Limited
    • Requires financial reports: Limited
    • Conducts site visits: Limited
    • Requires grant agreements: Limited
    • May require repayment: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 11.2%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.45; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.36; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.5%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.5% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.4% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.3% per year; rating input score 100; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 76.8% of revenue deployed · 81.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 18 of 18 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $14.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $369K · 30 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.3M reported
  • Consistency: 42 of 43 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 11 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 27 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 19 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 30/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 59/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 22/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 35/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.