Hancock Physician Network Llc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
352051598
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2020
Location
Greenfield, IN, USA
Phone
3174686236
Rating
58
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$36,726,486
Expenses
$56,766,422
Assets
$8,601,414
Liabilities
$25,053,891

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BRIAN MUCKERHEIDE (HPN PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • DR STEPHEN SHIVELY (PHYSICIAN): $632,375 total reported compensation
  • DR NAMRATA SHAH (PHYSICIAN): $602,292 total reported compensation
  • DR RUDO MASHINDI (PHYSICIAN): $520,629 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To improve the health of patients and families in the communities it serves with respect, integrity, and clinical excellence. Hancock physician network's vision is to be the premier provider of quality healthcare services to hancock and surrounding counties that achieves the highest level of patient satisfaction, patient outcomes, and quality of life.

What it reported doing in 2024

Hpn owns, operates, and manages physician practices that provide primary care, behavioral health services, and specialty care for the benefit of the residents of its community.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 92% 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

MIXED - 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 74
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 23
  • Sustainability: 6
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 96.1%; rating input score 96
  • Program expense ratio: 62.1%; rating input score 62
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • 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: 0%; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 56
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: -54.6%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.15; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 2.91; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.5%; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.8% per year; rating input score 100; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.3% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -7.6% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 96.1% of revenue deployed · 62.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 1 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $35.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $632K · 10 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 4 contractors listed · $1M reported
  • Consistency: 26 of 27 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 8 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 4 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.

  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 3/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 1/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 39/100.