Toiyabe Indian Health Project

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
952538049
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Bishop, CA, USA
Phone
7608738464
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Health, General and Financing

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$41,208,611
Expenses
$38,510,356
Assets
$49,728,022
Liabilities
$32,098,209

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

Leadership & pay

31 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • EARL LENT (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)

Highest reported compensation

  • SUMMER FRAIZER (CHIEF MEDICAL OFFICER): $426,574 total reported compensation
  • TAEMA WEISS (PHYSICIAN): $416,382 total reported compensation
  • PARISA PAYMAN (CHIEF DENTIST): $408,536 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 mission of the toiyabe indian health project is to provide healthcare and promotion wellness to indian communities. Toiyabe is a consortium of seven federally recognized tribes and to native american communities.

What it reported doing in 2024

As a consortium of seven federally recognized tribes, toiyabe indian health project provides healthcare services to both indian and non-indian patients in inyo and mono counties of California. Patients are seen in the company's bishop, lone pine, and coleville clinics. Services include medical, dental, dialysis, preventative medicine, behavioral health, elder care, wic, optical and public health for both native and non-native patients. The company is experiencing surges in new patient interest which is attributes to a respected provider base and quality of care.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 68
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 46
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 74.8%; rating input score 75
  • Program expense ratio: 79.6%; rating input score 80
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • 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 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 6.5%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.29; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.65; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9.4%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.2% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.6% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13.4% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 74.8% of revenue deployed · 79.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 21 of 21 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $30.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $427K · 31 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $4.2M reported
  • Consistency: 34 of 34 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 26 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 58/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 45/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 20/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 23/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.