Northeast Hospital Foundation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 760224541
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2012–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Aug 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Humble, TX, US
- Phone
- 281-540-6443
- Rating
- 77
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Hospital, General
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $321,063
- Expenses
- $206,904
- Assets
- $2,866,864
- Liabilities
- $42,968
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
8 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Tim Baker (President)
- Roy Hearnsberger (Vice President)
Highest reported compensation
- Brooke Baugh (Dir of Development & Prog): $134,583 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
A non-profit 501(c)(3) organization whose programs are dedicated to improving the health of Northeast Harris County, East Montgomery County, & West Liberty County.
What it reported doing in 2024
Project Mammogram - Provides funding for screening and diagnostic mammograms, ultrasounds, and follow-up procedures for women in Humble, TX, and surrounding communities who meet the Foundation's financial and service area guidelines. The Foundation provides breast health education and breast cancer awareness through outreach visits to various community missions and ministries, community partners, festivals, and local outreach centers. See Schedule O For FYE 6/30/25, Project Mammogram funded 881 patient services, including 329 clinical breast exams, 142 screening mammograms, 189 diagnostic mammograms, 203 ultrasounds, and 18 biopsies; these procedures led to the diagnosis of 2 cancers. There were also 23 education and outreach community presentations during the fiscal year. The long-term goal of Project Mammogram is to raise funds to ensure access to screening and diagnostic procedures for all mammogram patients.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 81% 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
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 62
- Transparency & Controls: 88
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 72
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 57%; rating input score 57
- Program expense ratio: 76.7%; rating input score 77
- Fundraising efficiency: $12 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 27th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 92.1%; rating input score 92; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- 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: 35.6%; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 13.86; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: Limited
Growth
- Program expense growth: -0.1% per year; rating input score 0; 30th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 2.8% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 13.1% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 8 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 3 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 57% of revenue deployed · 76.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $159K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $135K · 8 people listed
- Consistency: 24 of 25 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 3 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.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 57/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 44/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 42/100.