Gardner Family Care Corporation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 237153068
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2018
- Forms available
- Form 990 2018
- Location
- San Jose, CA, USA
- Phone
- 4089382172
- Rating
- 78
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Community Mental Health Center
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $26,340,381
- Expenses
- $26,151,631
- Assets
- $15,598,960
- Liabilities
- $10,156,311
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
19 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Reymundo Espinoza (CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- Sarita Patel (Psychiatrist): $316,733 total reported compensation
- Nhi Huynh (Psychiatrist): $306,966 total reported compensation
- Reymundo Espinoza (CEO): $296,102 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Gardner Family Care Corporation is dedicated to improving the health status of the communities we serve, especially the disenfranchised, disadvantaged and most vulnerable members. Our mission is to provide high quality, comprehensive health care, including prevention and education, early intervention and treatment, mental health and advocacy services which are affordable, respectful and linguistically and age appropriate.
What it reported doing in 2018
The organization provides parental and child health services for expectant mothers and their children, including health classes, nutritional services, counseling and referral services. Of the 5,862 clients served in the 6/30/19 fiscal year, over 90% were at or below the 200% federal poverty level.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Grant-funded. 87% 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.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 78
- Transparency & Controls: 70
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 33
- Growth: 80
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 87.7%; rating input score 88
- Program expense ratio: 88.3%; rating input score 88
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- 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; 67th 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: 0.7%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.6; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.65; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 5.5%; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 7.1% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 4.3% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -0.4% per year; rating input score 0; 18th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 87.7% of revenue deployed · 88.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $23.1M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $317K · 19 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 10 filing years from 2009 to 2018
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 8 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.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 38/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 27/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 23/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 37/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.
- High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is recorded as not currently operating in California.