Institute for Healthcare Communication

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
223208010
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2020
Forms available
Form 990 2020
Location
Danbury, CT, USA
Phone
8009704631
Rating
46
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$644,214
Expenses
$690,435
Assets
$37,528
Liabilities
$35,718

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Kathleen Bonvicini (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • Kathleen Bonvicini (CEO): $147,192 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To advance the quality of healthcare by optimizing the experience and process of healthcare communication through major activities: Education, advocacy, research, and partnerships.

What it reported doing in 2020

Provide ongoing training to hospitals and other medical institutions

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and a relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 46
  • Transparency & Controls: 83
  • Accountability: 10
  • Sustainability: 11
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 53.1%; rating input score 53
  • Program expense ratio: 49.5%; rating input score 50
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: Limited
  • Governance controls: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -7.2%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.05; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.95; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 21.3%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -17.9% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -13.9% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -67.6% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 53.1% of revenue deployed · 49.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $342K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $147K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 18 of 19 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2017 to 2020
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 53/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 50/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 16/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 7/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 15/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.