Beth Israel Dermatology Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
043117601
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Boston, MA, USA
Phone
7817448924
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Education N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue
$251,852
Expenses
$473,030
Assets
$5,432,845
Liabilities
$37,199

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • REYNOLDS MD RACHEL V (DIR (EXO)&PRES; INT DERM CHIEF/CHAIR): $675,424 total reported compensation
  • HELLER MD MARISSA (DIRECTOR (DERMATOLOGIST, HMFP)): $617,104 total reported compensation
  • CUKRAS MD ANTHONY (TREASURER (DERMATOLOGIST, HMFP)): $553,897 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The mission of beth israel dermatology foundation, inc. (the foundation) is to support the patient care, research, and teaching missions of beth israel deaconess medical center (bidmc) and harvard medical faculty physicians at beth israel deaconess medical center (hmfp) as well as to support teaching and research at the president and fellows at harvard college/harvard medical school (hms).

What it reported doing in 2024

The foundation uses its funds to support physicians' work in the dermatology department at bidmc and hmfp and to strengthen the department by supporting the educational requirements of the department 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 dermatology 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 dermatology field. During the period covered by this filing, the foundation provided support for patient care, research and education in the area of dermatology in conjunction with and to support the charitable missions of beth israel deaconess medical center (bidmc), harvard medical faculty physicians at bidmc (hmfp), harvard medical school (hms) and its affiliates.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% 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 voting board members are independent and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 74
  • Accountability: 26
  • Sustainability: 33
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 92.4%; rating input score 92
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Limited
    • 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: -87.8%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 11.49; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 83.9%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 20% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 11.6% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.2% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 92.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 3 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $437K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $675K · 7 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 17 of 17 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 15 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 48/100.