Sutter Medical Center Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
942788906
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Sacramento, CA, USA
Phone
9162866665
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$9,106,528
Expenses
$3,600,352
Assets
$68,906,026
Liabilities
$11,181,662

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

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Hollie Seeley (CEO, SMCS)

Highest reported compensation

  • Ronnie Yamanaka (CFO Sac Div & CFO SMCF (pt-yr)): $1,175,953 total reported compensation
  • Hollie Seeley (CEO, SMCS): $1,062,374 total reported compensation
  • Raya Elias-Petros (Chief Philanthropy Officer-SH): $1,058,747 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

See schedule o

What it reported doing in 2024

Through philanthropy, Sutter Health is able to practice the most innovative, technologically-advanced medicine possible and meet the critical health care demands of our time. In 2024, Sutter Medical Center Foundation provided over $1.8 million in philanthropic gifts to support programs, services and equipment to ensure the highest level of excellence in patient care. The list below highlights our allocation of gifts. The allocated funds went to the following programs, services, and equipment: . Brain Lab Neurosurgery Guidance System . Cancer Programs and Services . Children's Programs and Services . Cleft Palate Programs . Emergency Services Blanket Warmer . Gamma Knife Head Gear . Interventional Radiology Ultrasound Transducer Probe . Music Therapy . Neoview Video Intubation System . NICU . Patient Assistance . Patient Education Materials . Pet Therapy . PICU . Staff Scholarships and Training . Surgical Camera . Surgical Tables . Sutter Center for Psychiatry Patient Wellness Your support helped heal neighbors in your own community by bringing new innovations that allow us to provide the highest-quality health care, services and technologies close to home. With donor contributions, we were able to purchase leading-edge equipment, launch and continue programs that supported critical needs in our communities, help our physicians and staff save lives and fulfill our not-for-profit mission.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 73% of its reported program spending out as grants.

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 few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 48
  • Transparency & Controls: 76
  • Accountability: 86
  • Sustainability: 79
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 45.3%; rating input score 45
  • Program expense ratio: 68.2%; rating input score 68
  • 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: 99.8%; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 60.5%; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 19.14; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.16; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 36.3%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.3% per year; rating input score 100; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2% per year; rating input score 100; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.5% per year; rating input score 100; 22nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 45.3% of revenue deployed · 68.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 12 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1.2M · 17 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 45/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 3/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 49/100.