Erlanger Baroness Auxiliary

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
202573528
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Chattanooga, TN, USA
Phone
4237787436
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public Foundations

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,389,646
Expenses
$1,195,304
Assets
$458,110
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • IONA JONES (PRESIDENT)
  • JACQUE HART (PRESIDENT-ELECT)

People named in this filing

  • IONA JONES (PRESIDENT)
  • JACQUE HART (PRESIDENT-ELECT)
  • PAM VARNELL (TREASURER)

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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Support the chattanooga-hamilton county hospital authority which operates as erlanger medical center and t c thompson childrens hospital. The auxiliary enlists volunteers to assist through out both

What it reported doing in 2024

The erlanger baroness auxiliary engages a large group of volunteers that serve the hospital authority dba the erlanger medical center. The volunteers also operate a volunteer gift shop to supply funds to purchase needed equipment for the hospital.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 84% 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. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 62
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 58
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 86%; rating input score 86
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 0%; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 14%; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.38; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.1% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.8% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -3.2% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 86% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $1.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 22 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 18/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.