F F Thompson Hospital Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
222959984
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Canandaigua, NY, USA
Phone
5853966000
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,873,359
Expenses
$1,077,156
Assets
$19,410,627
Liabilities
$1,231,409

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

Leadership & pay

19 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Michael F Stapleton Jr (President/CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • Michael F Stapleton Jr (President/CEO): $1,022,632 total reported compensation
  • Mark F Prunoske (Sr VP Finance/CFO): $541,109 total reported compensation
  • Susan Fulmer MD (Board Member): $360,165 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

F.F. Thompson Hospital Foundation, Inc., a not-for-profit corporation, is committed to achieving philanthropic support for the services and priority needs of the F F Thompson Health System and its affiliated tax-exempt corporations and to overseeing the management of restricted and unrestricted funds of the Foundation.

What it reported doing in 2024

The Foundation operates to provide funds for the benefit of the FF Thompson Health System, FF Thompson Hospital (Hospital), Senior Communities, and MM Ewing Continuing Care Center (Continuing Care Center). The Foundation solicits, accepts, holds, invests, and administers funds and uses the income and principal thereof for the foregoing purposes.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 88% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 49% for direct work, and 51% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

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 few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 56
  • Transparency & Controls: 68
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 77
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 56.1%; rating input score 56
  • Program expense ratio: 74.5%; rating input score 75
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.7%; rating input score 95; 26th 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: 94.5%; rating input score 94; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 78.9%; rating input score 79; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 42.5%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 18.02; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 26.7%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.6% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.5% per year; rating input score 100; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2% per year; rating input score 100; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 56.1% of revenue deployed · 74.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 19 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $803K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1M · 19 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 35 of 36 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 60 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: Mission deployment rate scored 56/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 9/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 49/100.