Hackley Hospital Endowment Fd

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
386050335
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2017
Forms available
Form 990 2017
Location
Grand Rapids, MI, USA
Phone
6166535629
Rating
63
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,512
Expenses
$10,490
Assets
$42,827
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

1 person listed

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Trust assets are invested to provide income to be distributed to the charities named in the governing document.

What it reported doing in 2017

Grants are used to offset the expenses incurred by hackley hospital.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 74
  • Transparency & Controls: 93
  • Accountability: 12
  • Sustainability: 28
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 56%; rating input score 56
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Limited
    • Other executive compensation review process: Limited
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -317.6%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.08; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 34.3%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.4% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -2.7% per year; rating input score 0; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -4.5% per year; rating input score 0; 27th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 56% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 1 board members independent · 2 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $6K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $4K · 1 people listed
  • Consistency: 14 of 14 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2010 to 2017
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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.

  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 8/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 48/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 10/100.