Partners For Kids

Legal name: Children's Hospital and Physician's Healthcare Network

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
311429047
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2020
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2020
Location
Columbus, OH, USA
Phone
6147225958
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Hospital, General

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,249,832,975
Expenses
$1,115,140,403
Assets
$326,841,457
Liabilities
$192,148,888

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

35 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Sean Gleeson MD (PRESIDENT)
  • Pamela Edson (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • Timothy Robinson (DIRECTOR): $1,617,372 total reported compensation
  • Richard Miller (DIRECTOR): $1,518,683 total reported compensation
  • John Barnard MD (DIRECTOR): $1,200,203 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Explore tools to support your practice—insurance insights, prescribing guidelines, publications, and our latest newsletters. VIEW RESOURCES NEWS & UPDATES. Patience, Persistence and the Passion to Help: How Partners For Kids’ Care Coordinators Never Give Up for Families Read More General News & Updates.

What it reported doing in 2020

Quality Improvement, Community Health & Research (SEE SCHEDULE O)

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% 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. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 68
  • Accountability: 43
  • Sustainability: 48
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 88.7%; rating input score 89
  • Program expense ratio: 99.5%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 67th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 42.1%; rating input score 42; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 44
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 10.8%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.29; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.59; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0.3%; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 11% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 12.8% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 17% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: Mission, programs, and operating context captured from the official website.
  • Where the money goes: 88.7% of revenue deployed · 99.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 19 board members independent · 4 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.1B in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1.6M · 35 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $24.8M reported
  • Consistency: 42 of 42 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2017 to 2020
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 10 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 11 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.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 42/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 10/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 29/100.