Health Improvement Partnership of Santa Cruz County

Overview

Mission

To unite public and private health care providers and key community stakeholders to promote high-quality, high-value, and patient-centered care for all members of the santa cruz community with a focus on the safety net.

What it reported doing in 2024

Complex care-complex care coordination-hips role is to lead sustainable systems change to advance care coordination for our most vulnerable residents. Hip convenes partners to tackle the challenges of complex care coordination across multiple care settings including the hospital, clinics, mental health and substance use disorder treatment and housing agencies. We are also creating a forum to test and prepare for the ca health homes program.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 90% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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.

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
010826156
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Santa Cruz, CA, USA
Phone
8313051060
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public Health Program (Includes General Health and Wellness Promotion Services)

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,074,315
Expenses
$2,761,664
Assets
$1,642,541
Liabilities
$148,906

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

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 74
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 46
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 69.2%; rating input score 69
  • Program expense ratio: 77%; rating input score 77
  • Fundraising efficiency: $202.01 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: 10.2%; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.59; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.09; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.7%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 12.6% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 14.3% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.2% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 69.2% of revenue deployed · 77% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 23 of 23 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $2.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $159K · 25 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 19 of 19 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 annual filings from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 21/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 28/100.

Leadership & pay

25 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Maritza Lara (Executive Director): $159,343 total reported compensation
  • Suzette Reuschel-DiVirgilio (Programs Director): $135,053 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024.