Irving Healthcare Foundation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 751570933
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Irving, TX, USA
- Phone
- 2148204135
- Rating
- 90
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Standard
- Sector
- Hospital, General
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $5,016,628
- Expenses
- $7,499,759
- Assets
- $17,546,602
- Liabilities
- $7,888
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
26 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- John Drake (President)
Highest reported compensation
- Cindy Schamp (Director): $1,376,870 total reported compensation
- Amy Martin (VP CFO): $500,711 total reported compensation
- John Drake (President): $359,062 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To foster and support the activities and purposes of Baylor Medical Center at Irving, to encourage broad-based public support, and to advance its medical objectives including sponsorship of patient care, research, and educational and training programs.
What it reported doing in 2024
See Schedule O: Civic leaders established Irving Healthcare Foundation dba Baylor Scott & White Irving Foundation (IHF) as a public charity in 1977, to raise funds for nonprofit healthcare in Irving. To date, more than $80 million has been raised for nonprofit beneficiaries in Irving and our Foundation. Below are the key accomplishments made during the year.Our primary recipient is Baylor Scott & White Medical Center Irving (BSW Irving). During the fiscal year IHF granted more than $6.1 million to BSW Irving for new replacement medical equipment, facilities repairs and enhancements, staff continuing education, and patient care and operations.IHF also raises funds to help needy, uninsured residents in our service area through regular medical care at Baylor Scott & White HealthTexas Provider Network's Irving Community Clinic and Baylor University Medical Center. During the fiscal year, IHF granted more than $336,000 to the clinic and $58,000 to the medical center.IHF provides service dogs to adults and children with assistance needs through Baylor-Canine Companions for Independence with grants totaling almost $50,000 during the year.
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 97% of its reported program spending out as grants.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 90
- Transparency & Controls: 92
- Accountability: 97
- Sustainability: 34
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 90.8%; rating input score 91
- Fundraising efficiency: $8.86 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Pass
- 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 95.2%; rating input score 95; 25th 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: -49.5%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.34; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 12.3%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 7.7% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 5.8% per year; rating input score 100; 47th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 6% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 90.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 20 of 21 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $6.8M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $1.4M · 26 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
- 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: 8 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 115 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 34/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 24/100.