The St Louis Men's Group Against Cancer

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
431558366
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
St Louis, MO, USA
Phone
3147865950
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$718,590
Expenses
$688,024
Assets
$544,414
Liabilities
$2,663

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MARC ALPER (PRESIDENT)
  • MICHAEL LEFTON (IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT)
  • LARRY LEVY (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • KEVIN MEYER (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • BRIAN I PULTMAN (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • JEFFREY SPECTOR (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • ANITA KRAUS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (EFF. 12/24)): $10,962 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 st. Louis men's group against cancer is a nonprofit, charitable organization whose purpose is raising funds for cancer research, prevention, and care. Funds are distributed to various organizations to support specific programs in our community.

What it reported doing in 2024

We are a catalyst for advancement in cancer research, prevention and care. We are a community cancer resource center that brings the entire cancer community together - from the individuals and family members to the researchers seeking advancements in care and treatment - we strive to be a valuable resource to the st. Louis community.this year we provided 35 grants! Our research recipients have undertaken breakthrough projects that are leading to new treatments for patients. Our prevention recipients provide free screenings and education opportunities for those who cannot afford these critical services. Finally, our care recipients provide much needed support and assistance to anyone dealing with cancer.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 97% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 90% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 76
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 49
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 77%; rating input score 77
  • Program expense ratio: 79.6%; rating input score 80
  • Fundraising efficiency: $18.03 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 89.3%; rating input score 89; 38th 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: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 4.3%; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.79; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.6%; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.8% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.3% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.4% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 77% of revenue deployed · 79.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $548K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $11K · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 26 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 22 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 21 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 56/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 48/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 35/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 59/100.