Fourth Ward Clinic

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
741746576
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2015
Forms available
Form 990 2015
Location
Houston, TX, USA
Phone
7135293597
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Ambulatory Health Center, Community Clinic

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$8,325,616
Expenses
$5,564,985
Assets
$5,571,593
Liabilities
$1,400,511

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

21 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ANN THIELKE (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • MARY RAE (PHYSICIAN): $173,263 total reported compensation
  • ANGELA BARNES FILZEN (CHIEF DENTAL OFFICER): $161,448 total reported compensation
  • JEFFEEA GULLETT (PHYSICIAN): $159,131 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Gnhc promotes the well-being of our community by providing a full range of affordable quality primary and preventative health care in an environment that fosters dignity and respect.

What it reported doing in 2015

The ob/gyn department provided 1,177 prenatal visits from july 1, 2015 through june 30, 2016. We provide total obstetrical care for the community including prenatal care, intra-partum care and post-partum care. This includes both high risk and low risk obstetrical patients.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 63% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.
  • 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 program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 58
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 62
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 52.2%; rating input score 52
  • Program expense ratio: 66.2%; rating input score 66
  • Fundraising efficiency: $18.82 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: No; rating input score 0

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 33.2%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.25; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 22.5%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -7.7% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 14.2% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.2% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 52.2% of revenue deployed · 66.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $3.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $173K · 21 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $403K reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 32 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2012 to 2015
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 10 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 52/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 45/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 46/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.