Over 1.8 million nonprofits and charities for donors, volunteers and funders

Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation, Inc., National Office

Claim This Nonprofit

More Info

Add to Favorites

Share this Nonprofit

Donate

Nonprofit Overview

Causes: Breast Cancer, Cancer, Cancer Research, Education, Educational Services, Health

Mission: Susan G. Komen for the Cure celebrated its 25th anniversary with a new name, a new logo and a significant accomplishment: $1 billion invested since our inception in the global fight against breast cancer. And we have pledged to invest another $2 billion in the next decade in scientific research and community outreach programs. It will take investments of that level if we are to bring about a dramatic, unprecedented decline in breast cancer deaths over the next 10 to 15 years.

Programs: Grants to other non-profit organizations to support breast cancer research, as well as research resources and conferences that further the breast cancer research agenda. See schedule o for additional details.

public health education programs to increase the public's awareness of breast cancer including, among other things, early detection and treatment. See schedule o for additional details.

breast cancer screening, diagnosis and treatment programs and grants. See schedule o for additional details.

Community Stories

32 Stories from Volunteers, Donors & Supporters

35

Professional with expertise in this field

Rating: 1

They bought a lot of copyrights for every permutation of [BLANK] FOR THE CURE. Not money well spent. They are a pretty useless organization. They spend less than 15% of income on actual research related activities and a lot on overhead, advertising, and dinner parties for very rich people. You are a fool if you donate to this organization. Do yourself a favor and donate elsewhere.

11 oxbx08

Professional with expertise in this field

Rating: 2

You got to love how $15 million of a $20 million dollar TV advertising budget (Form 990 FY 2010-2011 Part IX Line 12) & $5.5 million of a $7.3 million dollar Event Production budget (Line 24d) is classified as a 'Program Expense'. If you were to move these line items from a program to a fundraising expense (because events and the advertising to get people to do those events are...if I'm not mistaken...fundraising, right?) that moves a total of $20.5 million that, in my opinion, have been classified incorrectly. In FY 2010-2011 charity navigator lists the following percentages for each dollar that comes in: 75% programs, 7.6% admin, and 17.2% fundraising. I propose that these numbers should be updated to reflect what is actually being done: 70.4% programs, 7.6% admin, and 22.4% fundraising. I'm steering clear of all other topics but for all the people who leave comments scolding the people who are upset about how this organization operates...here are some actual facts based on their own tax information.

5 edieeason

Professional with expertise in this field

Rating: 1

I would give this a NO-Star rarting of possible! I tried to put an honest personal experience I've had with Lomen, and it was rejected as Spam. I guess this is your way of dealing with criticism of your pet charities! They are not honest, and money donated is diverted to totally unconnected entities, who have no relationship with breast cancer.

Comments ( 1 )

profile

mjp23 08/02/2012

Hi Edie, we don't know why your review did not post a first time. There are many ways in which reviews might not get posted, including if you tried to post it from an office with a firewall. We do not have a spam filter for reviews, nor do we have "pet charities." We do not control a nonprofit's ratings -- users do. We're glad you were able to post a second time.

1 pathdoc

Professional with expertise in this field

Rating: 1

The organization is biased and not a good steward of its funds.

Review from Guidestar

9

Professional with expertise in this field

Rating: 1

I have been an oncology nurse for 20 years. I have been very uncomfortable with the Komen Foundation for a long time. I believe the pink ribbon campaign blurs the line between corporate sponsorship and using breast cancer to sell products. Komen completely marginalizes male breast cancer patients treating breast cancer as only a women's disease. 2000 men a year are diagnosed with breast cancer. They are not only having to cope with cancer but also the stigma of having a "women's disease".The most egregious thing that they do is promote the 3 Day Walk which this year is requiring each walker(even cancer survivors) to raise $2300.

3

Professional with expertise in this field

Rating: 1

The Susan G Komen foundation's size has made it insular in policy making and understanding its constituents - the beneficiaries of its services, its donors, and the general public. By hiring strongly politically aligned executives such as Karen Handel, SVP of Public Policy, the organization has lost its way and demonstrated it is unable to be objective and stand true to its mission of breast cancer cure and care. The low rating assigned reflects my current observation and not an indicator of its past performance or future potential. The foundation continues to handle the situation in a bad way by retaining executives that were responsible for a series of missteps and has not shown potential for cleaning up its corporate governance.

10

Professional with expertise in this field

Rating: 1

I've donated, bought shirts, run, and worked with some sponsored agencies. The foundation has now betrayed the women it purports to serve, and for political reasons. I will never support them again.

Review from Guidestar

12 Sybilann W.

Professional with expertise in this field

Rating: 1

Politically motivated organization that should lose its 501c3 status. Extremely low percentage of earnings actually devoted to research. Bullies smaller organizations seeking to provide care to women.

Review from CharityNavigator

5

Professional with expertise in this field

Rating: 2

Political agenda exposed and hints of more to come under closer scrutiny. One needs to look at 2011 annual report. Does not seem as favorable as 2010. This site seems to include PR under expenditures directly for the cause. No charity is doing a good job that isn't spending 80-85% on the true mission.

Review from CharityNavigator

3

Professional with expertise in this field

Rating: 1

This is outrageous. Here we have a major non-profit, taking on the political agenda of a few, destroying the ability to advance what they say is the main goal. We want to know. Who on the board or in the executive wing is connected to the anti-abortion folks? And using that influence? Have they been dismissed? How was this connection not disclosed? I urge all to discontinue contributions to this organization, and choose another, or show your disapproval by giving to Planned Parenthood instead--they are the ones on the front line providing health care to the millions of women who otherwise get no care.

4

Professional with expertise in this field

Rating: 1

Pulling funding from PP is an act of anti-humanitarianism. PP supports a large portion of undeserved people. In some cases, the people who used PP for preventative, life saving exams, it was their only access point to these services. The SKF is not for the benefit of the people, they now have a new role in playing a political game.

9 Linda Z.

Professional with expertise in this field

Rating: 1

As an RN i am appalled at the SGK foundation's politically motivated right wing decision (influenced by their new right to life radical right wing VP) to defund Planned Parenthood - an institution with a long and respected history of caring for poor, uninsured and underinsured women who count on PP for their yearly breast exams and mammograms. Don't lie to us - we've read the article in the Atlantic. We know the truth about WHY this came about - it was an entirely political decision - not one based on women's health. Your organization has been taken over by right to life advocates who are out to destroy Planned Parenthood and who care nothing about women or women's health. You're new rules were written specifically to take advantage of the witchunt of an investigation sponsored by Cliff Sterns, Rep. FL. http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/02/who-is-rep-cliff-stearns-the-man-behind-the-komen-decision/252469/ http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2012/02/top-susan-g-komen-official-resigned-over-planned-parenthood-cave-in/252405/

3

Professional with expertise in this field

Rating: 5

Susan G. Komen have done a courageous thing to step away from funding an organization that has veered away from responsible work in the area of women's health. They realized that what Planned Parenthood has become is not what they stand for and so have pulled the plug. If people had any real desire to help, vilifying Susan G. Komen Foundation is sadly misguided. Planned Parenthood do not do mammograms but only physical examinations, which has been stated not to be an effective screening for breast cancer. Planned Parenthood has been found to be a compromised organized, period. And even been found to be complicit in promoting underage sex and human trafficking http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fU4j8b1mMG4

2

Professional with expertise in this field

Rating: 1

Physician who supported this organization for decades. Never again.

3

Professional with expertise in this field

Rating: 1

As a fellow nonprofit professional and former support of the Komen Foundation, I am absolutely disgusted by their abandonment of young and poor women. No amount of money will make up for this formerly great foundation becoming a petty front group for religious extremists and bigots.

Review from Guidestar

6

Professional with expertise in this field

Rating: 1

The Komen group's preference to maintain revenue from politically motivated donors (and perhaps take its own political stance in the process) rather than fulfill its mission among disadvantaged women represents a failure to maintain ethical philanthropic standards. The already extreme marketing methods taken by the organization in its branding and fundraising efforts assume a cynical character given the decision to deny inclusion to Planned Parenthood programs. This cynicism is even more apparent as more information becomes available on how local offices have been surreptitiously denying funding for years to Planned Parenthood. This practice represents a pattern of political control - again, counter to the organization's mission - many donors would find unwarranted.

3

Professional with expertise in this field

Rating: 1

I am a fundraising professional and lecturer in non-profit administration and I am stunned by the Komen Foundation's lack of professionalism and adherence to its mission. Hiring a politician with a stated goal of shutting down funding to one of Komen's long-term partners was a terrible idea in the first place; allowing that person free reign to impose her political beliefs on the organization was another. Whatever one's political leanings, we've all got to agree that Komen's decision was not based on its mission of fighting breast cancer but on outside motives. Komen's mediocre record in channeling money to actual breast cancer research, its exorbitant spending on administration and lobbying costs, and its $1 million war chest to fund SLAPP lawsuits on smaller charities demonstrate that it is a very dark organization. It is the essence of the corporatization of the non-profit world: Make yourself rich by lobbying and massaging corporate interests, and leave your fellow non-profits and those you pretend to help in the dust. Don't give another dime to them.

1

Professional with expertise in this field

Rating: 1

As a medical student going into Obstetrics & Gynecology, I was horrified to hear that the Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation pulled their support for breast exams at Planned Parenthood. No trustworthy organization would put thousands of women at increased risk of breast cancer due to unavailable screening resources simply for religious or political reasons. I used to believe that this organization stood for protecting women and helping communities around the world, but their abandonment of all the wonderful work Planned Parenthood does has made me lose all respect for them.

Review from Guidestar

5

Professional with expertise in this field

Rating: 1

Years ago, when everything became "pink," from mixers to irons, I became suspicious that money for its own sake had overtaken SGK. It was no longer just raising money for cancer cure, it was raising money for itself. That was obvious to anyone who has a business background. So SGK lost track of its mission. SGK has apparently rediscovered a new mission in removing funding from an organization that serves poor people -- Planned Parenthood. And facts for those who jump in: no federal dollars are used for abortion, only 3% of what PP does is abortion; all the rest goes toward health care, screenings, pap smears and BREAST CANCER SCREENINGS. SGK is only a fund-raising organization. It provides no services or benefit. So, if you want to cure breast cancer, give to the American Cancer Society; if you want poor women to have health screenings, give to PP. And, on an unhappy note, RIP Susan G Komen. It's too bad that the organization that was intended to honor your memory made very bad political decisions when it shouldn't have gotten political at all.

1

Professional with expertise in this field

Rating: 1

Disgraceful organization. Never will support again.