Christian Hospital Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
431947644
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
St Louis, MO, USA
Phone
3146535000
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Single Organization Support
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,127,104
Expenses
$1,125,859
Assets
$6,290,392
Liabilities
$413,138

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

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • STEVENS RICK L (PRESIDENT/DIRECTOR)
  • CHEUNG NECOLE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • STEVENS RICK L (PRESIDENT/DIRECTOR): $730,453 total reported compensation
  • CHEUNG NECOLE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $177,926 total reported compensation
  • HOKAMP BRIAN (DIRECTOR): $170,485 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

With the gracious, vital support of our donors, the christian hospital foundation's mission is to partner with christian hospital to provide service, compassionate care and clinical excellence to our community.

What it reported doing in 2024

Patient support: our foundation is dedicated to improving the well-being of uninsured and underinsured patients by offering comprehensive support services post-discharge. We provided essential resources, including medication assistance, transportation services, and nutritional counseling to ensure a seamless transition from hospital to home. Our commitment extended to home visits and personalized follow-ups that addressed individual patient needs, fostered a nurturing environment that promoted healing and recovery, and reduced readmissions supporting each patient's unique journey to help them improve their health. Additionally, we have provided funding for a dedicated breast health navigator position and offered free mammograms to ensure early detection and treatment.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 70% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

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 total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 75
  • Transparency & Controls: 73
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 52
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 58.3%; rating input score 58
  • Fundraising efficiency: $0.79 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 25th 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: 99.2%; rating input score 99; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 73.3%; rating input score 73; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 0.1%; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.59; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.07; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.5%; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.2% per year; rating input score 0; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -5.4% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1.9% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 58.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 15 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $657K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $730K · 15 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 27 of 28 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 39 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.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 58/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 3/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 36/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: CEO compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 35/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 48/100.