Enloe Health Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
942985552
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Chico, CA, USA
Phone
5303327300
Rating
51
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Hospital, General

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,580,802
Expenses
$1,143,194
Assets
$30,678,262
Liabilities
$1,048,073

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

Leadership & pay

23 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MIKE WILTERMOOD (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • MIKE WILTERMOOD (CEO): $1,035,232 total reported compensation
  • KEVIN WOODWARD (CFO, VP OF FINANCE): $620,023 total reported compensation
  • BRADY HAYNES (FORMER OFFICER): $412,539 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 mission of enloe health foundation is to improve the quality of life through meaningful giving and volunteer opportunities all to benefit enloe medical center and the communities we serve.

What it reported doing in 2024

Cancer supportive funds are dedicated to ensure access to cancer services not covered by insurance, including transportation costs, compression garments, nutritional education, nurse navigator services and complimentary treatments aimed at reducing the unpleasant effects of treatment such as acupuncture and exercise training. Additionally, educational materials designed to aid in the psychological effects of cancer treatment are supported by the enloe celebration compassion fund and the aaron rodgers supportive therapies program fund. In fiscal year 2025, ehf funded various equipment purchases to replace/enhance patient care throughout the organization, including at the enloe regional cancer center.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 60% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 83% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most filed governance safeguards are in place. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 21
  • Transparency & Controls: 68
  • Accountability: 66
  • Sustainability: 85
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 10.9%; rating input score 11
  • Program expense ratio: 40.7%; rating input score 41
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.93 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 20th 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: 98.4%; rating input score 98; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 57.9%; rating input score 58; 9th 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: 68.1%; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 26.84; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12.6%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.4% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 11.2% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.8% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 10.9% of revenue deployed · 40.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 19 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $466K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1M · 23 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 11/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 41/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 58/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 12/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 23/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.