Hospice of Crawford County Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
251480565
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Meadville, PA, USA
Phone
8143335000
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,913,056
Expenses
$2,822,828
Assets
$4,497,595
Liabilities
$166,519

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • RENATO J SUNTAY (CEO/TREASURER)
  • TAMI L FARRELL (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • RENATO J SUNTAY (CEO/TREASURER): $556,391 total reported compensation
  • TAMI L FARRELL (CEO): $194,294 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 quality health and human services in response to identified needs in our service area and to provide for the basic health and human service needs of all persons, regardless of ability to pay.

What it reported doing in 2024

Hospice of crawford county, inc., provides hospice services to its patients. Hospice is all about living-living to the utmost until it is time to say farewell. Hospice is designed to help people who are nearing the end of life's journey to live as fully as possible at home, in familiar surroundings, close to family and friends. Attention to the needs of the whole person, physical, mental, emotional and spiritual, is the focus of hospice care. That care is provided by interdisciplinary groups of concerned people who include physicians, nurses, social workers, spiritual counselors and volunteers. Anyone can call for hospice information and care. Any resident of crawford county or contiguous areas surrounding counties who has been diagnosed as having a limited life expectancy is eligible for hospice services. The patient must be under the care of a physician who authorizes (continued on schedule o)

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 90% of the money available for current operations came from other operating 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

SUPPORTED - 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: 71
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 85
  • Sustainability: 49
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 79.9%; rating input score 80
  • Program expense ratio: 81.5%; rating input score 81
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 16th 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: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 3.1%; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.59; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.5%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.2% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.6% per year; rating input score 100; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.7% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 79.9% of revenue deployed · 81.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 6 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $2.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $556K · 9 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 32 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 15 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 45/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: CEO compensation review process not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 54/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 29/100.