Idaho Hospital Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
820303074
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Boise, ID, USA
Phone
2083385100
Rating
50
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,433,396
Expenses
$4,037,052
Assets
$4,721,450
Liabilities
$1,644,052

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

Leadership & pay

24 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BRIAN WHITLOCK (PRESIDENT/CE)

Highest reported compensation

  • BRIAN WHITLOCK (PRESIDENT/CE): $512,468 total reported compensation
  • TIM POWERS (VP FINANCE/C): $246,440 total reported compensation
  • STACEY CARSON (VP OPERATION): $214,460 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Providing leadership in health policy and advocacy and comprehensive member services that strengthen Idaho hospitals' viability and capacity to best serve their communities.

What it reported doing in 2024

A state cancer registry collected and analyzed data on all incidents of cancer in Idaho for education, research, and public health concerns. A federal grant and a new federal contract improved the quality, timeliness and completeness of cancer data collection in Idaho with an increased emphasis on using data for research. Hospitals received data, education and technical assistance to improve service delivery. A state tse registry collected and analyzed reportable cases and evaluated the health system's responses to time-sensitive encounters. A state grant provided database planning, implementation, and management of a time sensitive event registry in Idaho which now includes trauma, stroke, and heart attack incidents. See continuation on schedule o.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 61% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

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: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 85
  • Accountability: 96
  • Sustainability: 44
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 24th 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: 8.9%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.17; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.35; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 44%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 3.5% per year; rating input score 100; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3% per year; rating input score 100; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 16 of 17 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $512K · 24 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 12 of 13 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2016 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 8 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 42/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 2/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 30/100.