Good Samaritan Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
912004312
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2019
Forms available
Form 990 2019
Location
Tacoma, WA, USA
Phone
2534598141
Rating
54
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,645,685
Expenses
$1,223,882
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2019. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

28 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • WILLIAM ROBERTSON (PRESIDENT & CEO,INTERIM CFO)
  • MONICA HURLEY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • WILLIAM ROBERTSON (PRESIDENT & CEO,INTERIM CFO): $2,395,960 total reported compensation
  • VINAY MALHOTRA MD (VICE CHAIR,PHYSICIAN): $819,180 total reported compensation
  • JAMES MCMANUS (CFO): $393,457 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2019. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Partnering for healing and a healthy future through philanthropy.

What it reported doing in 2019

Good samaritan foundation supports the programs and operations of multicare health system's good samaritan hospital and the clinics in the primary area of eastern pierce county, wa. Multicare health system is a related healthcare tax exempt entity.in 2019 good samaritan foundation funded multicare good samaritan children's therapy unit (ctu) a program dedicated to help infants, children and adolescents who have special needs. The ctu funding ensures that children who need specialized therapies to reach their full potential will receive the help they need, regardless of insurance limitations or ability to pay.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 70% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

MIXED - 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: 76
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 47
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 14.6%; rating input score 15
  • Program expense ratio: 43.9%; rating input score 44
  • Fundraising efficiency: $6.99 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 95.7%; rating input score 96; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 73.7%; rating input score 98; 98th 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: 29.9%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -11% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -2.3% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.5% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 14.6% of revenue deployed · 43.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 22 of 23 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $538K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $2.4M · 28 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 10 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2010 to 2019
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 16 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 15/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 44/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 28/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 4/100.