Hopelight Medical Clinic
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 464657471
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2020–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2014
- Location
- Longmont, CO, US
- Phone
- (303) 776-7117
- Rating
- 85
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Family Services
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $5,860,472
- Expenses
- $5,701,336
- Assets
- $567,538
- Liabilities
- $574,133
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
9 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Edward Bowen (Executive Director)
- Eric Baxtor (Board President)
Highest reported compensation
- Shyll Bowen (Behavioral Health Director): $106,651 total reported compensation
- Devon Newburn (Admin Director): $77,267 total reported compensation
- Carey Kercher (Clinic Director): $75,000 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 provide compassionate and comprehensive healthcare to the Northern Colorado community, focusing on primary care, pediatrics, ABA Therapy, and counseling services, while accepting Medicaid and welcoming all uninsured patients regardless of financial circumstances.
What it reported doing in 2024
Our mission as a clinic is to provide primary medical care to low-income patients. In 2022 40% of our patients seen fell below a total income of less than 200% of the federal poverty guidelines. An additional 60% of our patients seen are a part of medicaid or medicare. In 2022 the clinic served 8500 patients. The clinic was open for five days a week Mon, Tues Wed Thurs and Friday. Donations of medicines and over the counter items allowed the clinic to offer medications to the clinics patients.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Other-operating. 86% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
- Distribution model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 87
- Transparency & Controls: 93
- Accountability: 82
- Sustainability: 29
- Growth: 80
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 97.3%; rating input score 97
- Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 10th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 56
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- 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: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 2.7%; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.1; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.01; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 4.8%; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 10.7% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 8.4% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -23.6% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 6 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 97.3% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $5.7M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $107K · 9 people listed
- Consistency: 39 of 42 current checks pass · 3 findings to review
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
- 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.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 3/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 44/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX PayrollTaxes column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 5/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 55/100.