Inland Empire Health Plan

Legal name: IEHP Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
365021477
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024, Form 990-N 2021
Location
Rancho Cucamonga, CA, USA
Phone
909-552-0509
Rating
64
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and/or Fund Distribution

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$35,711,114
Expenses
$7,609,257
Assets
$160,308,702
Liabilities
$17,368

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Gregory Bradbard (CEO)
  • Lisa Wright (Interim President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Randee RobertsSenior (Director, Finance (Left Dec. 2024)): $380,568 total reported compensation
  • Gregory Bradbard (CEO): $307,039 total reported compensation
  • Deanna Hendrick (Marketing and Communications Manager): $162,935 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 heal and inspire the human spirit.

What it reported doing in 2024

Grants: A responsive approach to the immediate needs of local community based organizations, these grants were awarded to 134 organizations, totaling $2,819,700 collectively. Funds were to be expended by the grantee over 12 months and used to support general operations towards improving community health.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 58% for direct work, and 42% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - Most voting board members are independent and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 43
  • Transparency & Controls: 66
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 87
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 23.9%; rating input score 24
  • Program expense ratio: 88.6%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 84.8%; rating input score 85; 18th 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; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 78.7%; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 21.07; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 13.7%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 143.7% per year; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -14.7% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 50% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 8 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 23.9% of revenue deployed · 88.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $6.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $381K · 14 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $3.7M reported
  • Consistency: 26 of 27 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 56 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 45 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 24/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 10/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.