Samaritan Healthcare Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
911230237
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Moses Lake, WA, USA
Phone
5097939641
Rating
62
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Alliance/Advocacy Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$484,061
Expenses
$48,969
Assets
$4,102,236
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • PJ DEBENEDETTI (PRESIDENT)
  • GRETCHEN YOUNGREN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • THERESA SULLIVAN (DIRECTOR): $663,976 total reported compensation
  • GRETCHEN YOUNGREN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $237,125 total reported compensation
  • NICOLE JACKSON (DIRECTOR (THROUGH AUGUST 2025)): $54,537 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The sole mission of the foundation as a non-profit fundraising organization is to ensure the continued availability of quality health care services and programs through public hospital district no. 1, grant county, Washington (dba: samaritan healthcare).

What it reported doing in 2025

Program and project grants to public hospital district no. 1, grant county, Washington (dba: samaritan healthcare): support in 2025 was for the #buildcommunity campaign for a new medical campus. Distribution of #buildcommunity funds to samaritan healthcare is projected to occur throughout the years 2026-2028.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 83% 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 most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 38
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 78
  • Sustainability: 85
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 17.2%; rating input score 17
  • Program expense ratio: 85%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 90%; rating input score 90; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 89.9%; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 83.77; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 454.1%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -14.2% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 12.8% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 14.2% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 17.2% of revenue deployed · 85% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 10 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $42K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $664K · 12 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 17 of 17 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 2 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 17/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 0/100.