Bmc Princeton Auxiliary

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
630869488
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Birmingham, AL, USA
Phone
2057837367
Rating
60
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Hospital, General
Affiliation
Christianity

Reported finances

Revenue
$70,659
Expenses
$30,151
Assets
$488,202
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • GINNY ELAM (PRESIDENT)
  • PAT ROBERSON (FIRST VICE PRESIDENT)
  • GLORIA CARLISLE (SECOND VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • GINNY ELAM (PRESIDENT)
  • PAT ROBERSON (FIRST VICE PRESIDENT)
  • GLORIA CARLISLE (SECOND VICE PRESIDENT)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The primary exempt purpose of this organization is to generate funds for use by brookwood baptist health - princeton baptist medical center a division of baptist health system, inc. The income generated through various fundraising activities and involvement of auxiliary members in the operation of the hospital's gift shop are used to improve medical technology, nursing education, and patient care.

What it reported doing in 2025

Make a difference fund - each year, bmc princeton auxiliary makes a temporarily restricted donation to the baptist health foundation (bhf) make a difference fund (mad). Bhf must spend the money as instructed by bmc princeton auxiliary. Generally, the funds are used to purchase services, medicine, and medical equipment for patients and for improvements at princeton baptist medical center.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 68% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 26
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 79
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 18%; rating input score 18
  • Program expense ratio: 47.4%; rating input score 47
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 57.3%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 16.19; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 26.2% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -15.3% per year; rating input score 0; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.3% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 18% of revenue deployed · 47.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $14K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 14 of 14 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2019 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 18/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 47/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.