Healthcare Foundation of Cleveland County

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
581905479
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Shelby, NC, USA
Phone
9804873028
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public Health Program (Includes General Health and Wellness Promotion Services)

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$248,692
Expenses
$208,980
Assets
$1,958,075
Liabilities
$50,287

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

People named in this filing

  • Richard Baker (Executive Dir.)
  • Scott Dixon (Secretary)
  • Emily Epley (Vice Chair)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To support, supplement, enhance and enrich hospital facilities, programs, and services in Cleveland county and related programs designed to improve the health and wellness of the citizens of Cleveland county.

What it reported doing in 2025

BECAUSE WE CARE FUND - contributed funds to assist cancer patients with expenses incurred during treatments including assistance with medications to and from treatment facilities and other expenses incurred by patientsSafe Kids/Kids Tips of Cleveland County. Contributions to assist with its mission to reduce accidental injuries, thru advocacy, engineering, and enforcement, that are a leading cause of injury and death for children. Contributions to the KM Hospital Volunteer Services to fund scholarships, volunteer programs, and services within the hospital and the community.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 77% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 95% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 62
  • Transparency & Controls: 84
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 69
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 66%; rating input score 66
  • Program expense ratio: 66.3%; rating input score 66
  • Fundraising efficiency: $8.86 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 75.5%; rating input score 75; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 16%; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 9.37; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 13.2% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.3% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.8% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 66% of revenue deployed · 66.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $138K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 23 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2017 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 5 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 34/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 32/100.