The Betty Ford Center

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
953863994
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2014
Forms available
Form 990 2014
Location
Rancho Mirage, CA, USA
Phone
7607734100
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Alcohol, Drug Abuse, Treatment Only

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$17,836,254
Expenses
$68,540,428
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

42 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MARK G MISHEK (PRESIDENT & CEO)
  • JOHN T SCHWARZLOSE (FORMER CEO)
  • JOHN M BOOP (PRESIDENT FOUNDATION)
  • ELIZABETH R FARVER-SMITH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • JOHN T SCHWARZLOSE (FORMER CEO): $1,312,526 total reported compensation
  • MARK G MISHEK (PRESIDENT & CEO): $842,991 total reported compensation
  • JAMES A BLAHA (TREASURER): $406,581 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To provide effective alcohol and other drug dependency treatment services, including programs of education and research, to help women, men and families begin the process of recovery.

What it reported doing in 2014

Outreach programs: 1,198 children and parents participated in one of the three betty ford center's children's programs located in Texas, Colorado and California. Over 95% of the participants received financial assistance to attend these programs totaling $600,873 in the period covering july 2014 - december 2014. The children's program training academy continues to work with two partners in the development of their programs. There was a women symposium sponsored by the center where people celebrated recovery by learning about the latest in treatment practices designed to benefit women. The center's alumni department offered its network of recovery support through 35 regularly scheduled chapter meetings across the united states and canada. There are over 5,000 alumni contacts to serve as support for patients leaving treatment.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 83% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 67% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 91
  • Accountability: 94
  • Sustainability: 4
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 93.7%; rating input score 94
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.38 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 96.7%; rating input score 97; 36th 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: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -284.3%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -9.3% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -23.9% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 93.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 29 of 30 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $64.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1.3M · 42 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.3M reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2009 to 2014
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 13 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 3 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 17/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Audit committee oversight not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 38/100.