Tracy Lane Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
463196000
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2016–2017
Forms available
Form 990 2014, Form 990-EZ 2017
Location
Los Angeles, CA, USA
Phone
8774061836
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Private Grantmaking Foundations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$90,274
Expenses
$157,951
Assets
$270,792
Liabilities
$425

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DEREK LANE (PRESIDENT)
  • PAUL PORTEOUS (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • ALEXANDRA LANE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

People named in this filing

  • DEREK LANE (PRESIDENT)
  • PAUL PORTEOUS (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • NANCY LANE (DIRECTOR)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The tracy lane foundation's mission is to memorialize tracy lane through collecting donations which will fund cervical cancer research and raise awareness about cervical cancer.

What it reported doing in 2017

Donations to cancer patients and caregivers

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 70% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 98% 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. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 70
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 28
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 83.9%; rating input score 84
  • Program expense ratio: 47.8%; rating input score 48

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -75%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.71; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 31.7%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 48.6% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -9.9% per year; rating input score 0; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -7.1% per year; rating input score 0; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 83.9% of revenue deployed · 47.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $75K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2016 to 2017
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 48/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 8/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 6/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 45/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.
  • High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is recorded as not currently operating in California.