Hancock County Health System Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
421481803
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2009
Location
Britt, IA, USA
Phone
6418435000
Rating
90
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$81,837
Expenses
$89,700
Assets
$906,013
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DEANNA KELLY (PRESIDENT)
  • NATHAN DYSKTRA (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • LAURA ZWIEFEL (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • JODI BALL (FOUNDATION DIRECTOR): $20,466 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The mission of the hancock county health system foundation is to cultivate funding for hancock county health system for health care services, medical equipment, and/or community needs and programs.

What it reported doing in 2024

The hancock county health system foundation was organized and incorporated in 1998. The board of directors are volunteer community leaders who support the mission of the foundation and its goals. The mission of the hancock county health system foundation is to cultivate funding for hancock county memorial hospital and its clinics for health care services, medical equipment, and/or community needs and programs. This is done through educating, initiating and fostering relationships with prospective and previous donors, thereby identifying their needs in relation to their gift making. This relationship-building will also facilitate, encourage and recognize private philanthropic gifts. The goal of the foundation is to grow the endowment to the point where the income it generates for the hospital can fund not only the capital spending budget but also for the future healthcare needs of this communtiy.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 93
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 51
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

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

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: -9.6%; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 10.1; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.4%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 11.6% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.1% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.7% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $90K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $20K · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 14 of 14 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 2 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.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 46/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 17/100.