Friend Family Health Center Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
364161801
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Chicago, IL, USA
Phone
3126826110
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Health Treatment Facilities, Primarily Outpatient

Reported finances

Revenue
$65,486,292
Expenses
$61,349,333
Assets
$80,301,917
Liabilities
$43,376,983

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

Leadership & pay

25 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Wendy Thompson (Chief Executive Officer)
  • Verneda Bachus (Chief Executive Officer (Until 6/2024))

Highest reported compensation

  • Verneda Bachus (Chief Executive Officer (Until 6/2024)): $589,724 total reported compensation
  • Wendy Thompson (Chief Executive Officer): $366,336 total reported compensation
  • Sarah Kidder-Nguyen (Chief Behavioral Officer): $312,583 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Mission: To provide a high quality, patient-centered, integrated system of care for all. Vision: Achieve the best outcomes for the individuals, families and communities we serve.

What it reported doing in 2024

Friend Health provides comprehensive, high quality primary and preventive health care services to satisfy the health care needs of medically underserved communities and individuals in Chicago.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and some related-organization disclosures are missing.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 63
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 48
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 69.4%; rating input score 69
  • Program expense ratio: 73.7%; rating input score 74
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 12th 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: 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; 77th 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: 6.3%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.31; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.54; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.8%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 12.1% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.7% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13.9% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 69.4% of revenue deployed · 73.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $45.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $590K · 25 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $4.6M reported
  • Consistency: 22 of 23 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 13 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 7 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 49/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 12/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 33/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.