Banner Health Foundation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 942545356
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2012–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Phoenix, AZ, US
- Phone
- 602.747.4483
- Rating
- 84
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Standard
- Sector
- Single Organization Support
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $39,169,513
- Expenses
- $40,172,582
- Assets
- $186,856,486
- Liabilities
- $23,456,517
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
39 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- ANDREA PETERSEN (DIRECTOR/PRESIDENT/CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- SHIVA BIRDI MD (DIRECTOR): $1,113,722 total reported compensation
- ANDREA PETERSEN (DIRECTOR/PRESIDENT/CEO): $981,461 total reported compensation
- RAHUL CHAWLA MD (DIRECTOR): $486,509 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Banner Health Foundation secures and stewards charitable gifts to support patient care programs and services operated by Banner’s many hospitals and health care facilities across Arizona.
What it reported doing in 2024
The banner health foundation fosters a spirit of giving by making healthcare solutions a reality for our community. Contributions made to the foundation are invested locally in banner health's not-for-profit facilities and programs to advance health and wellness. Caring for the future of Arizona since 1978, banner health foundation is supported by the generosity of individual donors, the public and private sectors, and hundreds of active volunteers.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 91% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 85% 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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 97
- Transparency & Controls: 73
- Accountability: 81
- Sustainability: 48
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 95.5%; rating input score 96
- Fundraising efficiency: $93.28 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 76%; rating input score 76; 15th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 91.2%; rating input score 91; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -2.6%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.65; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.13; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 6.8%; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 11.1% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 10.5% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 5.8% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 5 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 3 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 95.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 31 of 34 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $38.4M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $1.1M · 39 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 4 contractors listed · $640K reported
- Consistency: 44 of 46 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
- Filing history: 12 filing years from 2012 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 11 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.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 9 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 22/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 37/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Fund balance restriction sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.