Columbus County Hospital Foundation Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 010673231
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2015–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2014
- Location
- Whiteville, NC, USA
- Phone
- 9106428011
- Rating
- 71
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Single Organization Support
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $109,046
- Expenses
- $40,117
- Assets
- $672,776
- Liabilities
- $175,057
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
21 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JASON BECK (CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- JASON BECK (CEO): $496,263 total reported compensation
- M JEFFERY ARMSTRONG (CFO): $301,330 total reported compensation
- BRIAN JENKINS (VICE CHAIR): $205,513 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 provide compassionate care, advance healing and inspire hope for our patients and their loved ones.
What it reported doing in 2024
The foundation was established in february 2002 to continue the tradition of caring first instilled by dr. Warren edward miller, who established the first 12-patient hospital in whiteville in 1935. The foundation's goal is to strengthen our medical resources right here at home. The foundation is a not-for-profit organization governed by a volunteer board of directors. Through charitable gifts, the foundation helps meet the demand for modern equipment and services that build upon the community's health resources. The foundation is charged with raising and administering funds that will be used to further charitable, educational and healthcare objectives of the columbus regional healthcare system, as well as develop and administer fundraising campaigns to help crhs meet its short- and long-range goals. As more and more state and federal government and private insurers continue to cut and restrict reimbursement payments to hospitals, the foundation is one way to assist in compensating for this loss in revenue.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 92% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 43% for direct work, and 57% for grants.
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 program spending has declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 57
- Transparency & Controls: 80
- Accountability: 89
- Sustainability: 74
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 41.9%; rating input score 42
- Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 25th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 89.5%; rating input score 89; 24th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 63.2%; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 16.77; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.26; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 262.1%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -3.1% per year; rating input score 0; 21st percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 4.2% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 8.6% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 41.9% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 17 of 19 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $40K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $496K · 21 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 19 of 19 current checks pass
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 10 filing years from 2015 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Related organizations: 4 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 42/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 17/100.