Shands Auxiliary Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
593551267
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Gainesville, FL, USA
Phone
3522657962
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Opera

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$89,953
Expenses
$60,676
Assets
$151,617
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Louise Watson (President)
  • STEPHEN MOTEW MD (UF HEALTH PRES & SYSTEM CEO)
  • James J Kelly Jr (Former INTERIM STHC CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • STEPHEN MOTEW MD (UF HEALTH PRES & SYSTEM CEO): $1,608,122 total reported compensation
  • Robert Thornton (CFO STHC): $857,435 total reported compensation
  • James J Kelly Jr (Former INTERIM STHC CEO): $571,313 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 organization's mission is support UF Health promote health through outstanding and high-quality patient care, innovative and rigorous education in the health professions and biomedical sciences, and high-impact research across the spectrum of basic, translational and clinical investigation

What it reported doing in 2024

Shands Auxiliary, Inc. conducts activities for the benefit of the patients, visitors, and employees of UF Health Shands. Its operations include uniform sales and granting scholarships for healthcare education.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 99% 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.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 73
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 68
  • Sustainability: 57
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 74.9%; rating input score 75
  • Program expense ratio: 92.8%; rating input score 93
  • 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 60%; rating input score 60; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: 32.5%; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.5; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 172.1%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -4.9% per year; rating input score 0; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -2.4% per year; rating input score 0; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -5% per year; rating input score 0; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 74.9% of revenue deployed · 92.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 5 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $56K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1.6M · 8 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 16 of 16 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 39 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 37/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 3/100.