Portneuf Health Trust
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 481289745
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2011–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Pocatello, ID, US
- Phone
- (208) 239-1953
- Rating
- 57
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Single Organization Support
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $50,325,370
- Expenses
- $5,828,998
- Assets
- $250,857,389
- Liabilities
- $1,205,386
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
10 people listed
Highest reported compensation
- SHAUN MENCHACA (EXECUTIVE DI): $326,278 total reported compensation
- CLARK BITTON (CFO): $135,314 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Enhance and improve the health of southeastern Idaho and surrounding areas.
What it reported doing in 2024
The portneuf health trust (pht) is dedicated to ensure the community hospital benefit of portneuf medical center and to invest income from that partnership into community health initiatives. Areas of focus are on creating greater access to health care for the poor and underserved in our region and providing better health care technology and health education to the region. Pht also invests in physical infrastructure to promote health such as the portneuf greenway, an all-access regional playground for children to play and increase their mental and physical well-being, and the portneuf wellness complex. Also, the foundation invests in equipment, technology, and bricks and mortar for health west, a federally qualified health clinic, and programs for Idaho state university's family practice residency, cancer patient assistance fund, and a fun-fund for cancer patients.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 49% for direct work, and 51% for grants.
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 few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 27
- Transparency & Controls: 65
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 88
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 5.1%; rating input score 5
- Program expense ratio: 74.3%; rating input score 74
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 21st percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Missing
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 99.1%; rating input score 99; 38th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th 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: 88.4%; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 43.04; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 7.9%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -5.3% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 14.9% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 16.4% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 3 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 3 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 5.1% of revenue deployed · 74.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $4.3M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $326K · 10 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 30 of 31 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
- Filing history: 12 filing years from 2011 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 19 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 18 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.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 5/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.