Scl Health Research Institute Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
852014794
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2020
Location
Broomfield, CO, USA
Phone
8018427851
Rating
62
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Research Institutes and/or Public Policy Analysis

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,736,826
Expenses
$3,632,221
Assets
$2,957,596
Liabilities
$2,146,941

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • BRYAN JOHNSON (CHAIR): $1,085,130 total reported compensation
  • AMY CHURCH (FORMER OFFICER): $1,040,223 total reported compensation
  • JENNIFER DAVENPORT (VICE CHAIR): $620,755 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Helping people live the healthiest lives possible.

What it reported doing in 2024

Scl health research institute, inc. Is a medical research organization which is directly engaged in the continuous active conduct of medical research in conjunction with one or more hospitals. The sole member of the organization is sisters of charity of leavenworth health system, inc. (sclhs).the activities of scl health research institute, inc. Are devoted solely to the following:1. Serve as the research function for sclhs in support of its charitable purposes.2. Conduct clinical research at sclhs's hospitals, reporting to the quality committee of the sclhs board of directors, which oversees the research function at all sclhs hospitals on behalf of the sclhs board of directors.3. Provide and/or ensure there is sufficient staffing, oversight, management/study support at each of the sclhs hospitals.4. Ensure regulatory compliance with fda and other federal and state laws and regulations governing clinical research.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 96% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 68
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 37
  • Sustainability: 32
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 75.5%; rating input score 75
  • Program expense ratio: 77.6%; rating input score 78
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Limited
    • 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: 2.8%; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.81; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.73; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 20.3%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.1% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.8% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 19% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 75.5% of revenue deployed · 77.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 3 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1.1M · 4 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 23 of 23 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 84 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 44/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 30/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 12/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 12/100.