Children's Minnesota

Legal name: Children's Health Care Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
411814223
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Minneapolis, MN, USA
Phone
(952) 992-5300
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and/or Fund Distribution

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$25,529,747
Expenses
$22,283,949
Assets
$106,560,425
Liabilities
$12,540,879

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

Leadership & pay

43 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MARC GORELICK (PRESIDENT AND CEO)
  • JENNY SODERHOLM (CDO & FOUNDATION PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • MARC GORELICK (PRESIDENT AND CEO): $4,156,070 total reported compensation
  • BRENDA MCCORMICK (SVP & CFO): $995,606 total reported compensation
  • JENNY SODERHOLM (CDO & FOUNDATION PRESIDENT): $679,076 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

We're on a mission to deliver the health care children deserve — highly specialized, deeply compassionate and made just for them.

What it reported doing in 2024

Program: children's health care foundation (the foundation) supports the mission of children's health care dba children's hospitals and clinics (children's), by obtaining financial resources that are leveraged to champion the special needs of children and their families and to improve children's health by providing high-quality, family centered pediatric services. The foundation is the fundraising arm for children's, which formed in 1924, and is one of the largest children's health care organizations in the u.s., with 462 staffed beds at our two hospital campuses in st paul and minneapolis. See schedule o.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 80% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 69
  • Transparency & Controls: 69
  • Accountability: 98
  • Sustainability: 70
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 75.3%; rating input score 75
  • Program expense ratio: 75.1%; rating input score 75
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5.92 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 20th 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: 99.9%; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 96.8%; rating input score 97; 31st 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: 12.7%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.78; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.12; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -2% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.7% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.7% per year; rating input score 100; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 2 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 75.3% of revenue deployed · 75.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 30 of 31 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $16.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $4.2M · 43 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.2M reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 11 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 9 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 24/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 24/100.