The Beechwoodblocher Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
133201806
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Getzville, NY, USA
Phone
7168107371
Rating
51
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and Fund Distribution

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$170,240
Expenses
$19,886
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Daniel P O'Neill (President/CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • Daniel P O'Neill (President/CEO): $320,901 total reported compensation
  • Kristin M Anderson (VP of Finance/CFO): $240,647 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 BEECHWOOD/BLOCHER FOUNDATION, INC WAS A NOT-FOR-PROFIT ORGANIZATION WHOSE PURPOSE WAS TO RAISE AND ADMINISTER FUNDS FOR THE BENEFIT OF NOT-FOR-PROFIT CORPORATIONS THAT ARE EXEMPT FROM TAX UNDER SECTION 501 (C)(3) OF THE INTERNAL REVENUE CODE AND ARE NOT PRIVATE FOUNDATIONS. The Organization merged with Beechwood Continuing Care, Inc. effective 7/1/25. Net assets were transferred to the surviving entity.

What it reported doing in 2025

THE FOUNDATION RAISED AND ADMINISTERED FUNDS FOR THE BENEFIT OF NOT-FOR-PROFIT CORPORATIONS EXEMPT FROM TAX UNDER SECTION 501(C)(3) OF THE INTERNAL REVENUE CODE THAT ARE NOT PRIVATE FOUNDATIONS. The Organization merged with Beechwood Continuing Care, Inc. effective 7/1/25. Net assets were transferred to the surviving entity.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

MIXED - 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: 22
  • Transparency & Controls: 68
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 47
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 6.5%; rating input score 6
  • Program expense ratio: 55.2%; rating input score 55
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: 88.3%; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2,823.8%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -10% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -3.3% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 6.5% of revenue deployed · 55.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $11K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $321K · 8 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 14 of 14 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2013 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 6/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 55/100.
  • 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 — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 0/100.