Barrett Hospital Foundation Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 363597000
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Dillon, MT, USA
- Phone
- 4066833000
- Rating
- 71
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Single Organization Support
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,061,626
- Expenses
- $397,392
- Assets
- $6,930,554
- Liabilities
- $10,227
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
16 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Brooke Erb (Executive Director (until Dec))
- Taylor Rose (CEO - BHH)
Highest reported compensation
- Kelly Smith (Director (until Nov)): $396,849 total reported compensation
- Anna Loge (Director): $387,562 total reported compensation
- Danielle Beck (Vice Chair): $220,424 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Barrett Hospital Foundation's mission is to engage and steward healthcare philanthropy, funds, services, and programs to enhance Barrett Hospital and Healthcare, ensuring continuous healthcare excellence for our community.
What it reported doing in 2024
The Barrett Hospital Foundation raises funds in support of the services provided by Barrett Hospital Development Corporation. These funds help provide technologically up-to-date equipment, better serving our patients. During the year, the Foundation raised funds and provided $317,356 in support for services provided by Barrett Hospital Development Corporation, in addition to support provided for the Southwest Montana Mammography Program and scholarship allocations. Barrett Hospital Development Corporation operates the hospital for the Public Hospital District for Beaverhead County. Barrett Hospital Development Corporation provided in-kind services of $132,976 to the Foundation during the fiscal year.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 68% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% 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. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 71
- Transparency & Controls: 66
- Accountability: 66
- Sustainability: 83
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 76%; rating input score 76
- Program expense ratio: 86.7%; rating input score 87
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Missing
- Foreign activity oversight: 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: 81.8%; rating input score 82; 18th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 4 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 44
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- 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: 62.6%; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 17.44; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 33.1%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 2% per year; rating input score 100; 27th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 7.8% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 15.6% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 76% of revenue deployed · 86.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 9 of 11 board members independent · 4 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $344K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $397K · 16 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 22 of 23 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- Related organizations: 2 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.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 9 not reported.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 6/100.