Partnership for Better Health
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 231352161
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2011–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Carlisle, PA, USA
- Phone
- 7179609009
- Rating
- 93
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Community Health Systems
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $5,818,512
- Expenses
- $4,110,896
- Assets
- $107,751,581
- Liabilities
- $1,432,265
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
16 people listed
Highest reported compensation
- CAROL THORNTON MPA (EXEC. DIRECTOR (BEG. 1/14/24)): $133,799 total reported compensation
- ANN CARNEY (FINANCE DIRECTOR): $80,584 total reported compensation
- REBECCA H RALEY MA (EXEC. DIRECTOR (UNTIL 1/14/24)): $28,737 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The partnership for better health champions and invests in ideas, initiatives, and collaborations that improve the health of the people and communities in our region.
What it reported doing in 2024
The partnership for better health (foundation) provides funding for grants and initiatives that seek to eliminate health disparities and address the roots of health issues, toward ensuring that all people have the chance to enjoy healthy lives. In line with our trust-based grant making approach, our grant priorities include three application categories comprised of general operating grants for organizations leading in equity work, project grants to address root issues and spark grants. Priority consideration is given to grantees that address issues like health equity, and social determinants of health, and which are centering people with lived experience. Further, each project and spark grant is assigned one or more core funding areas aligned with the social determinants of health (health care access and quality; social and community context; economic stability; education access and quality; and neighborhood and the built environment). In addition, during fiscal 24-25, $149,400 in foundation initiatives were approved which will focus on high priority areas such as perry county health coalition, nonprofit capacity development, workplace wellness, and sustainable food systems.in the current fiscal year, the foundation awarded $2,455,196 for 85 grants and other assistance to local organizations. An additional $443,413 was put back into the local community from initiatives approved in prior fiscal years.programs at sadler health center received 18% of the total grants and initiative funding for health services that include dental care and community health workers to provide outreach, community education, informal counseling, social support and advocacy. The foundation made investments of $25,000 in landisburg ems for their citizen responder campaign in perry county, $17,000 for increased food storage and refrigeration capacity to the paw packs program in cumberland county, and $4,947 to central Pennsylvania conservancy to install an ada-compliant wheelchair ramp to support equitable access to letort spring garden preserve's historic barn. Carlisle cares was awarded $85,000 to improve its capacity to address homelessness in greater shippensburg. For northern adams county, the foundation awarded grants to south central community action program's gleaning project for $50,000 to decrease food insecurity and $15,000 to the adams county children's advocacy center for education and outreach to vulnerable children. The partnership awarded $96,480 to 12 nonprofits to address emergent social isolation issues across the entire service area. These grants were reviewed and approved by a group of people with lived experience from our community as part of our new participatory grantmaking program. Other assistance to local organizations focused on increasing access to healthcare, affordable housing, food security, addressing opioid addiction, and advancing high-quality youth development programs. The foundation's strategic approach includes coalition building, policy advocacy, public education and nonprofit capacity building. We serve as a catalyst, advocate and collaborator to make health a shared priority toward establishing our communities as the healthiest in the nation.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 61% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 82% 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. Some filed totals do not add up and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 94
- Transparency & Controls: 87
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 83
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 96.9%; rating input score 97
- Program expense ratio: 90%; rating input score 90
- Fundraising efficiency: $420.21 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 13th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 89.5%; rating input score 89; 25th 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: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- 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: 29.3%; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 26.21; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 5.9%; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 5.7% per year; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 5.4% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 3.1% per year; rating input score 100; 24th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 96.9% of revenue deployed · 90% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $3.7M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $134K · 16 people listed
- Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $127K reported
- Consistency: 32 of 33 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 12 filing years from 2011 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 57 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 54 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.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 47/100.