The Arnold Gold Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
223052098
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Fort Lee, NJ, USA
Phone
2015677999
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,988,744
Expenses
$3,924,350
Assets
$13,141,840
Liabilities
$683,796

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

Leadership & pay

33 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KATHLEEN REEVES MD (PRESIDENT AND CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • KATHLEEN REEVES MD (PRESIDENT AND CEO): $557,034 total reported compensation
  • JOANNE CORTESE (CHIEF FINANCE & ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER): $229,402 total reported compensation
  • ELIZABETH CLEEK (SVP, CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER): $228,860 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 gold foundation champions humanism in healthcare, which we define as clinically excellent care that is kind, safe, and trustworthy. This gold standard of care embraces all and targets barriers to such care. We empower experts, learners, and leaders to create clinical and educational systems and cultures that support humanistic care for all.

What it reported doing in 2024

Program development and research - the gold foundation develops, pilots, and supports programs designed to teach the tools and habits of humanism to physicans, nurses, and medical and nursing students. Research efforts explore and spotlight issues surrounding humanism in healthcare and how it is taught, conveyed, and learned.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 77% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 97% 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 76
  • Accountability: 93
  • Sustainability: 33
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 87.2%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: $8.51 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 25%; rating input score 25; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 96%; rating input score 96; 26th 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: 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: -31.3%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.35; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 45.5%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.5% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -5.3% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.5% per year; rating input score 100; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 87.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 24 of 25 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $3.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $557K · 33 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 38 of 40 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2018 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 10 filed money-flow records
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

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

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 25/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 32/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 4/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 2/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.