Bih Radiologic Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
042571853
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Boston, MA, USA
Phone
7817448924
Rating
65
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Health Support Services

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,042,447
Expenses
$719,908
Assets
$19,225,427
Liabilities
$614,027

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • KRUSKAL MD PHD JONATHAN B (DIR (EX-OFF)/PRES; RADIOLOGY CHF/CHR): $1,007,224 total reported compensation
  • KUNG MD JUSTIN (DIR; EXECUTIVE VICE CHAIR, RADIOLOGY): $691,326 total reported compensation
  • CUTTS MD JENNIFER (DIRECTOR; RADIOLOGIST, HMFP): $638,556 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 bih radiologic foundation (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 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) and harvard medical faculty physicians at beth israel deaconess medical center (hmfp). The foundation uses its funds to support the physician's work in the radiology departments at bidmc and hmfp and to strengthen the department by supporting its educational programs. The foundation also uses its funds to support expenses incurred by its supported organizations which benefit the physicians and other personnel who are engaged in activity related to the radiology field.

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: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 74
  • Accountability: 26
  • Sustainability: 76
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 79.6%; rating input score 80
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 5th 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: 30.9%; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 26.71; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 108.5%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1.2% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -18.3% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.1% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 79.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 6 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $573K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1M · 12 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 18 of 18 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 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 — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 57/100.