The Foundation of St. Mary's Healthcare

Legal name: The Foundation of St Mary's Healthcare

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
133254655
IRS 990 coverage
2008–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Amsterdam, NY, USA
Phone
(518) 842-1900
Rating
62
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,183,736
Expenses
$488,164
Assets
$18,032,258
Liabilities
$1,059,206

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

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • AL TURO (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • JEFFREY METHVEN (SECRETARY): $649,242 total reported compensation
  • DR KEVIN COPE (DIRECTOR): $555,896 total reported compensation
  • KEITH WATERS (CFO): $239,722 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Rooted in the loving, healing ministry of Jesus and inspired by the legacy of the Sisters of St. Joseph of Carondelet, we serve all with compassion and excellence.

What it reported doing in 2024

The foundation distributed funds to st. Mary's healthcare for capital purposes and made grants to associates and patients in need. Grants to associates included professional development initiatives to provide opportunities for training and education, as well as assist those facing financial hardship in times of extraordinary need. Grants to vulnerable patients were made to ensure health and safety and improve patient outcomes.

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 72% 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: 47
  • Transparency & Controls: 68
  • Accountability: 77
  • Sustainability: 79
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 57.4%; rating input score 57
  • Program expense ratio: 45.9%; rating input score 46
  • Fundraising efficiency: $1.5 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 24th 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: 94.9%; rating input score 95; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 68.8%; rating input score 69; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 58.8%; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 36.94; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 46%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -14.5% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.9% per year; rating input score 100; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.5% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: Mission, programs, and operating context captured from the official website.
  • Where the money goes: 57.4% of revenue deployed · 45.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 16 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $224K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $649K · 18 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 26 of 27 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2008 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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.

Key Signals

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

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 57/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 46/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 4/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 2/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 50/100.