Ashtabula Regional Medical Center

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
383975135
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Ashtabula, OH, US
Phone
440.997.2262
Rating
61
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$33,759,509
Expenses
$29,335,991
Assets
$13,770,688
Liabilities
$3,294,806

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

Leadership & pay

25 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LEONARD STEPP JR (PRESIDENT/CEO)
  • LEANNE FRAMPTON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ARMC RHH)
  • RICHARD TRICE (GB PRESIDENT (STARTED 02/04/24))
  • SUSAN SHADLE (ARHHS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • DAVID NOVAK MD (VICE-CHIEF OF STAFF (END 12/31/24)): $829,401 total reported compensation
  • DANIEL B KEATON MD (CHIEF OF STAFF (END 12/31/24)): $351,826 total reported compensation
  • RICHARD TRICE (GB PRESIDENT (STARTED 02/04/24)): $261,279 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To improve the health and well-being of the communities we serve.

What it reported doing in 2024

Glenbeigh operates and maintains an inpatient hospital and five regional outpatient centers for the treatment of individuals with substance use disorders. Glenbeigh offers a full continuum of care including: medically supervised withdrawal management, inpatient rehabilitation, partial hospitalization, extended residential treatment, intensive outpatient treatment, continuing care, and sober living opportunities. The goal is to provide a solid foundation in recovery to patients so they can establish and maintain lasting recovery. Glenbeigh provides quality treatment to adults living with substance use disorders regardless of race, creed, gender, national origin, sexual orientation, disability or social/economic standing. Glenbeigh is committed to creating a recovery community filled with people who are living longer, more fulfilling lives.glenbeigh's three largest community benefit program service accomplishments, as measured by expenses, are: the provision of charitable care in the form of scholarships, community health improvement initiatives and community building activities. As part of our commitment to promoting healing, glenbeigh offered community health improvement initiatives that served over 16,000 people at a cost of $225,289. Community health improvement services include: glenbeigh's bridges to recovery and music and message events; community drug and alcohol abuse presentations; family, parenting and sibling programs; community health fairs; first responder recognition and training; bereavement support groups; as well as symposiums and summits on the topics of addiction, treatment and sustaining long-term recovery. Glenbeigh shared our expertise in the field of substance use disorder with 110 regional nursing students and counselor/social worker interns from many colleges and universities offering programs that educate, empower, motivate and help bring recovery to the world. Glenbeigh also offered training on the identification of a potential overdose and the proper use of naloxone. A significant component of the community health improvement category was the provision of transportation to ensure access to care. Over 2,023 individuals utilized glenbeigh's transportation services at a cost of $100,145. Community building activities address the needs of the community beyond addiction treatment services. Glenbeigh expended $6,849 on various activities and collaborated with other entities offering recovery support events. Community building activities included health advocacy and served 1,807 individuals. Total 2024 community benefit initiatives served 16,298 individuals at a cost of $225,289. Net benefits had an offsetting revenue of $4,725 for cash and in-kind contributions which served 3,288 persons at a net benefit of ($13,712).

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 99% 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 - 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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 42
  • Transparency & Controls: 77
  • Accountability: 93
  • Sustainability: 52
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 44.6%; rating input score 45
  • Program expense ratio: 51.3%; rating input score 51
  • Fundraising efficiency: $0.18 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 20th 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: 13.1%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.47; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.24; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.6%; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -4.5% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.2% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0.5% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 6 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 44.6% of revenue deployed · 51.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 16 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $15.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $829K · 25 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.7M reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 7 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 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: Mission deployment rate scored 45/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 51/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 14/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 53/100.