California Healthcare Institute

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
943174767
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2015
Forms available
Form 990 2015
Location
San Diego, CA, USA
Phone
8585516677
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Group Health Practice (Health Maintenance Organizations)

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$534,000
Expenses
$963,973
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

30 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SARA RADCLIFFE (PRESIDENT/CEO)
  • TODD GILLENWATER (SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT - ADVOCACY)

Highest reported compensation

  • SARA RADCLIFFE (PRESIDENT/CEO): $284,563 total reported compensation
  • TODD GILLENWATER (SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT - ADVOCACY): $243,322 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The California healthcare institute (chi) was founded in 1993 as an independent organization devoted to researching and advocating policy to forward the interests of California's biomedical community. Chi has built a membership of over 275 leading biomedical companies, academic and research institutions and companies involved in supporting the biomedical community.

What it reported doing in 2015

Back to session reception: legislators, legislative staff, biomedical industry executives, academic leaders and the patient community gather to celebrate California's life sciences innovations. At the reception, industry, research and education partners come together to discuss their shared commitment to discover and improving human health. Spring dc event: chi brings together legislators, their staff and leaders from California's life sciences and academic communities for a celebration of the state's achievements in biomedical innovation in Washington d.c. Hundreds of attendees enjoy conversation with public policymakers and California's biomedical opinion leaders about the issues that matter most to our industry. At the invitation-only visionary awards dinner following the reception, we honor federal legislators who have been stand-out champions for the advancement of biomedical innovation.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 85% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 72
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 1
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 97.2%; rating input score 97
  • Program expense ratio: 53.9%; rating input score 54
  • Fundraising efficiency: $0.79 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

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: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 96.6%; rating input score 97; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -80.5%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 54.8%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -50.8% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -12.8% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -10.7% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 97.2% of revenue deployed · 53.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 28 of 29 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $519K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $285K · 30 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2010 to 2015
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 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 — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 54/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 3/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.