Houston Methodist

Legal name: The Methodist Hospital Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
760094743
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Official website data refreshed
Jul 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Houston, TX, United States
Phone
713.790.3311
Rating
67
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Hospitals and Related Primary Medical Care Facilities
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$150,906,332
Expenses
$57,799,483
Assets
$1,012,959,031
Liabilities
$1,260,300

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

Leadership & pay

21 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SUSAN H COULTER (DIRECTOR, PRESIDENT/CEO, PART YEAR)
  • FLYNN A ANDRIZZI PHD (DIRECTOR, PRESIDENT/CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • MARC L BOOM MD (DIRECTOR): $8,338,578 total reported compensation
  • KEVIN J BURNS (ASSISTANT SECRETARY, PART YEAR): $3,228,085 total reported compensation
  • EDWARD L TYRRELL (TREASURER): $1,125,246 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

See schedule o.

What it reported doing in 2024

Contributions to the houston methodist hospital foundation are used to fund various research, special purpose, or other designated endowment programs as requested by the donor. Special purpose funds can designate specialty care for indigent patients or other things such as stroke awareness programs for the community. Research designated fund donations support things such as the work of doctors in education and research, scientists in the general internal medicine discipline, or research for nanotechnology in treating brain cancers.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 71% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

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: 48
  • Transparency & Controls: 72
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 90
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 43.1%; rating input score 43
  • Program expense ratio: 66.9%; rating input score 67
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4.87 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 28th 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; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 88.2%; rating input score 88; 35th 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: 61.7%; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 17.53; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.1%; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.1% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.5% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 43.1% of revenue deployed · 66.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 17 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $38.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $8.3M · 21 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 23 of 24 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 9 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: 18 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 43/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 20/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 36/100.