Ah Hospice Foundation Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 451348449
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2012–2015
- Forms available
- Form 990 2015
- Location
- Jacksonville, FL, USA
- Phone
- 9044936756
- Rating
- 70
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Single Organization Support
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $266,316
- Expenses
- $221,958
- Assets
- $203,011
- Liabilities
- $21,285
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
5 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- SCOTT MAHOSKY (PRESIDENT)
- PAULA ROPELEWSKI (SECRETARY/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- PAULA ROPELEWSKI (SECRETARY/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $77,811 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To advance hospice care by supporting community education on end of life issues, providing resources for those suffering the loss of a loved one and helping individuals with a terminal illness live their lives to the fullest.
What it reported doing in 2015
The organization provided funds for a hospice educational conference in Arizona and end of life materials for distribution at support groups and for family members. Material was bought for veteran patient blankets in Virginia. The organization assisted with annual hospice memorials and plaques memorializing patients that were placed on memorial trees or walls at each hospice site. In addition, the organization provided assistance to patients for extraordinary needs such as utility and phone bills, funeral expenses, and nonmedical needs.informational stats: brochures/pamphlets provided to families: approximately 6500plaques made for the trees of life at two of the sites: 80bereavement mailings with grief information, etc.: approximately 29,700other mailings (i.e., surveys on bereavement services): approximately 6500grief books/educational booklets for family members/support groups: approximately 1150memorial services helped: 5 for a combined total of approximately 365 family membersassistance to families: rent/utilities/phone: 33some assistance with funeral expenses: 67miscellaneous (monitors, ramp, etc.): 15
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 51% for direct work, and 49% for 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 58
- Transparency & Controls: 94
- Accountability: 68
- Sustainability: 53
- Growth: 40
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 51.1%; rating input score 51
- Program expense ratio: 61.3%; rating input score 61
- Fundraising efficiency: $65.61 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 80%; rating input score 80; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- 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: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 16.7%; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.91; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.1; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 35.1%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 2.4% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -13.3% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -3.7% per year; rating input score 0; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 51.1% of revenue deployed · 61.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 4 of 5 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $136K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $78K · 5 people listed
- Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 4 filing years from 2012 to 2015
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
- 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 51/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 41/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 34/100.