Fredericksburg Community Health Center

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
912129853
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Fredericksburg, TX, USA
Phone
8309908651
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Health Treatment Facilities, Primarily Outpatient

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$6,163,703
Expenses
$1,842,064
Assets
$8,129,566
Liabilities
$14,374

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOHN D WILLOME (Executive Director)
  • BRENNA NANCE (President)
  • CHERYL ROWAN (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • JOHN D WILLOME (Executive Director): $143,859 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of the Good Samaritan Center is to provide a safe, Christ- Centered environment that gives our patients quality, coordinated and affordable healthcare.

What it reported doing in 2025

The Center provides medical appointments, specialist referrals, public health screenings, home visits, prescription assistance, and social work services for over 1,000 unduplicated individuals each year who are uninsured and live below 250% of the federal poverty level. Patients must live in Blanco, Gillespie, Kimble, or Mason Counties or the towns of Comfort or Brady, Texas. Partnerships include our local hospital/health system, local specialists, Methodist Healthcare Ministries, Prevent Blindness Texas, and the Central Texas Food Bank.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 93% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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 some filed totals do not add up.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 48
  • Transparency & Controls: 87
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 83
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 25.6%; rating input score 26
  • Program expense ratio: 76.3%; rating input score 76
  • Fundraising efficiency: $43.38 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 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: 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: 70.1%; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.41; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.8%; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.5% per year; rating input score 100; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 21.6% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 25.1% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 25.6% of revenue deployed · 76.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $144K · 15 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $348K reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 26/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D expense reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 41/100.