Big Bend Hospice Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
593258493
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Tallahassee, FL, USA
Phone
8508785310
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Hospitals and Related Primary Medical Care Facilities

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,390,689
Expenses
$1,648,824
Assets
$10,285,327
Liabilities
$137,001

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

Leadership & pay

22 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DENA STRICKLAND (PRESIDENT BBH FOUNDATION)
  • WILLIAM WERTMAN (CEO/ADMINISTRATOR BBH)

Highest reported compensation

  • WILLIAM WERTMAN (CEO/ADMINISTRATOR BBH): $392,989 total reported compensation
  • JON WOOD (CSO/BBH): $320,436 total reported compensation
  • DENA STRICKLAND (PRESIDENT BBH FOUNDATION): $278,219 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Big bend hospice foundation is a not-for-profit organization that was established to solicit contributions and other community support to support big bend hospice, a related organization whose mission is "to inspire hope by positively impacting the way our community experiences serious illness or grief - one family at a time."

What it reported doing in 2024

Big bend hospice foundation, inc. Was established in 1996 with the sole purpose of supporting the mission, programs, and services of big bend hospice, inc. (bbh), a related tax-exempt organization. The foundation serves as the primary fundraising arm of bbh, securing philanthropic contributions to enhance compassionate end-of-life care for patients and their families. Funds raised by the foundation support a variety of specialized programs, including the bereavement services program, which provides professional counseling and emotional support to children and adolescents coping with the loss of a loved one. Licensed counselors help young individuals develop healthy strategies for navigating grief. (continued on schedule o)

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 87% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 44% for direct work, and 56% for 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 reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 69
  • Transparency & Controls: 88
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 77
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 71.2%; rating input score 71
  • Program expense ratio: 88.3%; rating input score 88
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: 31%; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 6.24; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 17.9%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.2% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 71.2% of revenue deployed · 88.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 19 of 19 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $393K · 22 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 34 of 34 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 5 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: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 15/100.