Foundation for Health Improvement & Technology

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
452420126
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2013
Forms available
Form 990 2013
Location
Richmond, VA, USA
Phone
8043433448
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$737,900
Expenses
$721,683
Assets
$215,117
Liabilities
$3,130

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • THOMAS D DAYSPRING (DIRECTOR): $314,499 total reported compensation
  • BAJET NOUR (DIRECTOR): $180,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The foundation for health improvement and technology will focus on disease prevention by encouraging and facilitating efforts that lead to improved health. The initial core interest will be in ameliorating the impact of cardiovascular diseases.

What it reported doing in 2013

Physicians acknowledge that patient education is an important and complex issue that brings value to their practice, but many in an increasingly busy clinic environment are unable to overcome the barriers hinder implementation of programs. Lack of patient compliance is one such impediment that is associated with poor clinical outcomes, increased hospitalization, lower quality of life, and higher overall healthcare costs. Patient education has been demonstrated to significantly improve compliance with medicine across a broad range on conditions and disease severities. The foundation for health improvement and technology (fhit) is dedicated to worldwide, high level education on the widespread utility of biomarkers in cardiometabolic disease prevention and treatment. The current web portals lecturepad.org and biomarkerbliki.org have been extremely effective at educating clinicians and laboratory professionals. Fhittv, launched in january 2014 is dedicated to patient centered education and recruitment, with easy to use site navigation, ability to comment and live streaming. Coded in the newest language the platform is supported on all browsers and mobile devices. Fhittv supports a wide variety of adult learning processes to foster the users internal motivation and self-directed learning goals and overall satisfaction.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% 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 - 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 44
  • Sustainability: 36
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 89.7%; rating input score 90
  • Program expense ratio: 91.7%; rating input score 92
  • Fundraising efficiency: $43.28 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 78; 78th 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: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • 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: 40%; rating input score 40; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: 2.2%; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.3; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 68.5%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 19.2% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -29% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 89.7% of revenue deployed · 91.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 5 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $662K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $314K · 5 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2011 to 2013
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 40/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 47/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 16/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.