Community Health Partners Regional Foundation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 341504558
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2013
- Forms available
- Form 990 2013
- Location
- Lorain, OH, USA
- Phone
- 4409603397
- Rating
- 76
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Fund Raising and/or Fund Distribution
- Affiliation
- Christianity
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $4,483,228
- Expenses
- $2,758,626
- Assets
- $0
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
16 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- EDWIN OLEY (BOARD MEMBER, PRESIDENT - COMMUNITY RMC)
- SCOTT PEMBER (FOUNDATION PRESIDENT)
- SUSAN BOWERS (BOARD MEMBER, PRESIDENT - AMC)
Highest reported compensation
- EDWIN OLEY (BOARD MEMBER, PRESIDENT - COMMUNITY RMC): $423,164 total reported compensation
- SUSAN BOWERS (BOARD MEMBER, PRESIDENT - AMC): $213,904 total reported compensation
- SCOTT PEMBER (FOUNDATION PRESIDENT): $101,115 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The primary exempt purpose of community health partners regional foundation is to provide financial support to community health partners regional medical center and its related facilities, thereby extending the healing ministry of jesus and improving the health of our communities with emphasis on people who are poor and underserved. These activities reflect our core organizational values of compassion, excellence, human dignity, justice, sacredness of life and service.
What it reported doing in 2013
Supporting the charitable mission of community health partners regional medical center dba mercy regional medical center, community health partners regional health system dba mercy health system and allen medical center dba mercy allen hospital through the provision of charitable solicitation and investment services.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 63% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 96% 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: 86
- Transparency & Controls: 68
- Accountability: 84
- Sustainability: 51
- Growth: 40
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 87.2%; rating input score 87
- Fundraising efficiency: $3.42 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 5th 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: 83.9%; rating input score 84; 21st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 81.2%; rating input score 81; 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: 38.5%; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 3.1%; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: 20.7% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -34.9% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 87.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 13 of 16 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.4M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $423K · 16 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 20 of 21 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 4 filing years from 2010 to 2013
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 105 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 14/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: CEO compensation review process not reported.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.