Henry Ford Health Providence Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
383526629
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Detroit, MI, USA
Phone
3138768714
Rating
54
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Corporate Foundations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$8,879,970
Expenses
$2,346,644
Assets
$33,468,509
Liabilities
$933,458

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

Leadership & pay

21 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ROBERT G RINEY (PRESIDENT/CEO (START 10/2024))

Highest reported compensation

  • ROBERT G RINEY (PRESIDENT/CEO (START 10/2024)): $7,081,174 total reported compensation
  • ROBIN S DAMSCHRODER (TREASURER/CFO (START 10/2024)): $3,410,191 total reported compensation
  • MICHAEL MCCULLOUGH (CFO, MINISTRY MARKET (END 9/2024)): $1,146,026 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

As one of the nation's leading integrated health systems, it is the mission of henry ford health system, a related entity of the filing organization, to improve people's lives through the excellence of the science and art of health care and healing.

What it reported doing in 2024

To solicit and invest contributions, gifts, and bequests for the benefit of henry ford health providence hospital and affiliated organizations. Henry ford health providence hospital and affiliated organizations use this funding to provide the following: neonatal intensive care unit expansion and renovation; new halfway houses; minimally invasive spine surgery program enhancements; associate hardship support; campus walking path enhancements; elliott breast center expansion & renovation; breast care services funding for patients in need; scholarships & educational support for medical students & residents.

Operating model

Revenue model
Affiliate-supported. 79% of the money available for current operations came from contributions from related organizations.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 86% 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: 62
  • Accountability: 80
  • Sustainability: 87
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 15.5%; rating input score 15
  • Program expense ratio: 43.6%; rating input score 44
  • Fundraising efficiency: $6.59 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 20th 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: 37.9%; rating input score 38; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 81.2%; rating input score 81; 15th 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: 73.6%; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 14.26; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.6%; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.6% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.7% per year; rating input score 100; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.5% per year; rating input score 100; 22nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 15.5% of revenue deployed · 43.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 16 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $7.1M · 21 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 21 of 22 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 409 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.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 38/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 24/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 39/100.