The Brooklyn Hospital Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
112936410
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Brooklyn, NY, USA
Phone
7182508000
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,495,623
Expenses
$2,622,714
Assets
$7,638,981
Liabilities
$71,528

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

Leadership & pay

19 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • GARY TERRINONI (PRESIDENT & CEO)
  • DEBBIE NIEDERHOFFER (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • GARY TERRINONI (PRESIDENT & CEO): $1,830,384 total reported compensation
  • J ANDERS COHEN MD (TRUSTEE): $868,295 total reported compensation
  • JAMES GASPERINO MD (TRUSTEE): $663,830 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 foundation exists to support the vision and mission of the brooklyn hospital center (tbhc) through a charitable organization committed to the brooklyn community. The primary purpose and scope of the foundation is to support a broad range of educational and clinical programs and services which strive to improve the healthcare delivery system in brooklyn. The vision of the foundation supports and complements the vision of tbhc and its partners, with a firm commitment to a continued presence and service to residents, providers, employers, organizations and healthcare providers. The foundation is specifically committed to pursuing clinical excellence through research and education; to improving access to healthcare through community service and outreach programs; and to support economic development through philanthropic gifts and grants. The foundation is rooted deeply in brooklyn, to serve its residents, to strengthen its resources and to provide the means for a healthier brooklyn.

What it reported doing in 2024

Provide funds for the brooklyn hospital development program and help pay for health and educational programs.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 93% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 81% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

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 a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 69
  • Transparency & Controls: 72
  • Accountability: 60
  • Sustainability: 77
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 63.1%; rating input score 63
  • Program expense ratio: 80.7%; rating input score 81
  • Fundraising efficiency: $24.03 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 20th 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; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 47.4%; rating input score 47; 8th 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: 25%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.91; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.2%; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.6% per year; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.7% per year; rating input score 100; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.6% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 63.1% of revenue deployed · 80.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 19 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1.8M · 19 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 23 of 23 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 10 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 19 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.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 47/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 59/100.