Arkansas Valley Regional Medical Center

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
841465990
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Official website data refreshed
Aug 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
La Junta, CO, US
Phone
(719) 589-2511
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Hospital, General

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$44,629,531
Expenses
$46,230,158
Assets
$24,566,356
Liabilities
$4,601,337

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

Leadership & pay

19 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DAVID A FLEMER JR (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • MICHAEL MORLEY DO (DIRECTOR/PHYSICIAN): $707,466 total reported compensation
  • JAMES BRADY (PHYSICIAN): $533,548 total reported compensation
  • ALBERT STERNS (PHYSICIAN): $517,805 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Arkansas Valley Regional Medical Center is a community-owned organization providing high-quality, respectful, and compassionate health care services to individuals and families in southeastern Colorado.

What it reported doing in 2024

The medical center operates an acute-care hospital and provides inpatient, outpatient, and emergency care services to the community regardless of race and insurance. The medical center provided 1,742 inpatient days, 38,503 outpatient visits, 12,767 emergency room visits, and 127 births during the year. The medical center also provides care to persons covered by governmental programs at or below cost and to individuals who are unable to pay.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 94% 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.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Revenue has declined or grown slowly and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 77
  • Transparency & Controls: 74
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 24
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 88.1%; rating input score 88
  • Program expense ratio: 85.3%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • 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: 81.8%; rating input score 82; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 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: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -3.6%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.53; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.19; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8.6%; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.1% per year; rating input score 100; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.4% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2.7% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 8 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 88.1% of revenue deployed · 85.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 11 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $39.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $707K · 19 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $2.9M reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 9 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 19/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 17/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 26/100.