The Southampton Hospital Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
113466516
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Southampton, NY, USA
Phone
6317268301
Rating
86
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$19,953,326
Expenses
$28,288,454
Assets
$13,997,166
Liabilities
$5,267,365

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

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • EMILY MASTALER (PRESIDENT & CAO, EX-OFFICIO)
  • JULIA MCCORMACK (PRESIDENT & CDO)

Highest reported compensation

  • JULIA MCCORMACK (PRESIDENT & CDO): $279,829 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 southampton hospital foundation, inc., a separate nonprofit corporation with an independent board of trustees, supports stony brook southampton hospital's mission to deliver healthcare services and expand clinical programs to meet the needs of its east endcommunities. Although the southampton hospital foundation, inc., has existed for some time, recent changes to its structure and mission have put greater emphasis on fund raising for and increased public awareness of the hospital's programs and services. The foundation concentrates its efforts on increasing critical philanthropic support to ensure high-quality healthcare for all our neighbors on the east end. In 2025, we anticipate furthering monies raised toward the new goal for the east hampton emergency department of $50m resulting from post-covid supply cost increases, as well as furthering the capital campaign to build a new stony brook southampton hospital.

What it reported doing in 2024

See schedule osouthampton hospital foundation is the fund-raising organization of the southampton hospital association. A separate, not-for-profit corporation, the foundation seeks to heighten awareness and maximize private philanthropy to advance and strengthen the mission and vision of stony brook southampton hospital.in calendar year 2024, the foundation raised a total of $19,291,905 in cash and pledges, from private foundations, businesses, and individuals in support of stony brook southampton hospital's general and restricted purposes. Of this total, $17,295,335 were cash contributions. Contributions are used to support general operating needs as well as a range of specific clinical programs and services, medical technology, and equipment as well as uncompensated care and support services for vulnerable populations.the foundation raises funds through a broad array of fundraising activities including special events, grants, direct mail, capital campaigns, planned gifts, major gift solicitations and social networking. The foundation also collaborates with local and regional community and fraternal organizations to raise funds to advance the mission of stony brook southampton hospital.in 2024, in addition to unrestricted funds, the foundation undertook fund raising initiatives in support of key clinical initiatives that were supportive of the hospital's strategic plan. These clinical initiatives included the stony brook east hampton emergency department, the paulson family emergency department, the audrey and martin gruss heart & stroke center, the ed & phyllis davis wellness institute, the ellen hermanson breast center, the kathleen d. Allen maternity center, the edie windsor healthcare center, the regional tick-borne disease resource center, and the phillips family cancer center. The foundation also planned and implemented its 66th annual summer party the objective of which is to heighten awareness of and raise funds in support of the hospital's needs.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 97% 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

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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 91
  • Transparency & Controls: 81
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 20
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 93.8%; rating input score 94
  • Fundraising efficiency: $11.05 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • 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; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th 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: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -41.8%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.49; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.38; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1%; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 31.4% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.3% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.4% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 93.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $26.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $280K · 18 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 4 contractors listed · $566K reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 31 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 10 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 41/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 15/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: CEO compensation review process not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 39/100.