Gardens Regional Hospital & Medical Center Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
330738307
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2013
Forms available
Form 990 2013
Location
Hawaiian Gardens, CA, USA
Phone
5628600401
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Hospital, General

Reported finances

Revenue
$239,310,990
Expenses
$243,783,989
Assets
$19,452,041
Liabilities
$15,642,628

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JIM SHERMAN (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)

Highest reported compensation

  • SAKARIN NIMNIYOM (DIRECTOR OF FINANCE): $182,191 total reported compensation
  • KATHLEEN V TRAN (PHARMACIST): $135,131 total reported compensation
  • TESSIE ROBILLOS-MEZA (DIRECTOR - HEALTH INFORMATION MGMT): $120,925 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To enhance the health and well-being of our patients, their families, and the community through the provision of safe, caring, effective health care services that are designed to promote or improve health and wellness.

What it reported doing in 2013

Tri-city provides inpatient, outpatient and emergency care services to patients in a licensed 107-bed acute care hospital. As part of tri-city's commitment to affordable health care and social services, tri-city provides a significant amount of charity care, including discount payment programs and free health care to those patients with demonstrated financial need. In 2013, there were 3,145 inpatient admissions; 14,602 outpatient visits; and 9,493 emergency room visits.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 97% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 72
  • Sustainability: 20
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 97.6%; rating input score 98
  • Program expense ratio: 95.8%; rating input score 96
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 67th 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: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 60%; rating input score 60; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: -1.9%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.08; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.8; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0.3%; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -5.4% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -23% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 97.6% of revenue deployed · 95.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 5 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $233.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $182K · 12 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $5.7M reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2010 to 2013
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 9 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 14/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 16/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.