Beth Israel Deaconess Department of Neurology Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
043030397
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2013, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Boston, MA, USA
Phone
7817448924
Rating
49
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Health - General and Rehabilitative N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue
$146,546
Expenses
$59,773
Assets
$2,370,627
Liabilities
$24,339

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

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KIMBALL MD MPH ALEXA B (DIRECTOR (EX-OFFICIO) (HMFP CEO))

Highest reported compensation

  • KIMBALL MD MPH ALEXA B (DIRECTOR (EX-OFFICIO) (HMFP CEO)): $1,224,783 total reported compensation
  • RUTKOVE MD SEWARD (DIR(EX-OFF)& PRES; NEURO CHIEF/CHAIR): $712,030 total reported compensation
  • SELIM MD PHD MAGDY (DIR CHF STROKE & CEREBROVASC BIDMC): $566,771 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

See schedule o.

What it reported doing in 2024

During the period covered by this filing the beth israel deaconess department of neurology foundation, inc. Used its funds to support medical research, provide instruction, and participate in activities designed to improve the general public health of patients served by beth israel deaconess medical center (bidmc), harvard medical faculty physicians at beth israel deaconess medical center (hmfp) and their affiliates including the physicians' work in the neurology departments at bidmc and hmfp. These activities strengthen the departments by supporting the educational requirements of the departments and physicians worldwide by providing training seminars and other classes. The foundation also uses its funds to support expenses incurred by its affiliated entities which benefit the physicians and other personnel who are engaged in activity related to the neurology field. All activities that the foundation participates in are focused on medical procedures, research, and other activities that are inspired to enhance methods utilized in the field of neurology.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 34
  • Transparency & Controls: 69
  • Accountability: 27
  • Sustainability: 78
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 23.9%; rating input score 24
  • Program expense ratio: 63.3%; rating input score 63
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 26th 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; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 7.1%; rating input score 7; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 56
    • 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: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 59.2%; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 39.66; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1,555.5%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 29.3% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 23.2% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 15% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 23.9% of revenue deployed · 63.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 1 of 14 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $38K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1.2M · 17 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 17 of 18 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 81 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 24/100.
  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 7/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 9 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 45/100.