Conway Hospital Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
570870199
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Conway, SC, USA
Phone
8433478037
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Hospital, General

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,199,168
Expenses
$286,071
Assets
$10,262,762
Liabilities
$15,904

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

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BRIAN ARGO (PRESIDENT)
  • TED MILFORD (VICE PRESIDENT, FOUNDATION)

Highest reported compensation

  • BRIAN ARGO (PRESIDENT): $1,083,093 total reported compensation
  • TED MILFORD (VICE PRESIDENT, FOUNDATION): $452,801 total reported compensation
  • DAVID MIER (TREASURER (THRU 9/24)): $450,067 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The conway hospital foundation is a not-for-profit corporation established in 1988 as a charitable organization to provide support to conway hospital in its effort to fulfill its mission and goals. (see schedule o) description of organization missionthe foundation is dedicated to improving the quality of life of all individuals in the conway hospital service area. The organization develops cooperation between the hospital staff and board, medical staff, the community, and other supporting organizations through educational and promotional activities. Resources for the foundation derive from fundraising, donations, grants, and other sources where appropriate to assure long-term growth and development. Critical success factors: development of financial resources, management of financial and/or human resources, responsiveness to the hospital, commitment to planning, leadership by board and staff.

What it reported doing in 2024

To provide financial assistance to support conway hospital and affiliates in fulfilling its mission and goal through projects related to nursing, scholarships, community outreach, patient care and health reach services for the underprivileged through conway hospital, inc. And affiliates.

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 - 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 few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 56
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 83
  • Sustainability: 84
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 47.7%; rating input score 48
  • Program expense ratio: 88.6%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 86.7%; rating input score 87; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: 76.1%; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 35.87; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 60.1%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.1% per year; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.9% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.7% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 47.7% of revenue deployed · 88.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 15 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $253K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1.1M · 18 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 20 of 20 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 2 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 48/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.