Community Hospital Anderson Foundation Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 861053152
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2011–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Anderson, IN, USA
- Phone
- 7652985133
- Rating
- 71
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Single Organization Support
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $958,673
- Expenses
- $1,214,118
- Assets
- $17,071,753
- Liabilities
- $2,802,500
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
21 people listed
Highest reported compensation
- ELIZABETH S THARP MBA BSN RN (DIRECTOR): $1,179,930 total reported compensation
- TOM BANNON (CHIEF FOUNDATION OFFICER): $386,805 total reported compensation
- TERESA QUANT-CALLENDAR MD (DIRECTOR): $351,025 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Community hospital anderson foundation, inc. Is engaged in fund raising activities to acquire monies to further the purposes and mission of community hospital of anderson and madison county, inc. In providing quality medical care and treatment to citizens of anderson and madison county, Indiana.
What it reported doing in 2024
Community hospital anderson foundation, inc. A) provides capital improvements & medical equipment for use by community hospital of anderson and madison county, inc. And b) provides programs designed to educate the patients of community hospital of anderson and madison county, inc. Concerning their health needs and available medical treatment. 2024 capital purchases included a bone mill for surgery, two ultrasounds, and a concrete slab and shed for the community farm, which grows approximately 30,000 pounds of produce that is distributed free of charge to people in the community who are at risk of food insecurity.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 87% 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 expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 71
- Transparency & Controls: 69
- Accountability: 74
- Sustainability: 35
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 92.4%; rating input score 92
- Program expense ratio: 61%; rating input score 61
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 86.7%; rating input score 87; 3rd 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: 98.1%; rating input score 98; 46th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 73.7%; rating input score 74; 15th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 75
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Limited
- 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: -26.6%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 14.06; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.16; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 57.1%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 8.1% per year; rating input score 100; 56th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 5.6% per year; rating input score 100; 47th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 15.5% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 92.4% of revenue deployed · 61% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 14 of 19 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $741K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $1.2M · 21 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 26 of 28 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 9 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 41 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 7/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 35/100.