Inner City Health Center
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 742426085
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Denver, CO, US
- Phone
- (303) 296-1767
- Rating
- 74
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Community Mental Health Center
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $7,783,294
- Expenses
- $8,782,454
- Assets
- $13,595,141
- Liabilities
- $1,000,788
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
20 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- CHARLES GILFDORD III (CEO)
- KRAIG BURLESON (CEO EMERITUS (THROUGH APRIL 2025))
Highest reported compensation
- KAITLIN SOMMER (PHYSICIAN): $213,110 total reported compensation
- RANDALL CRAIG (CMO): $212,245 total reported compensation
- ELANA COSTANZA (DENTIST): $163,742 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Inner City Health is a Christ-centered healthcare home for underserved individuals with consistent, high quality treatment in an atmosphere of genuine respect.
What it reported doing in 2024
Outpatient medical and dental services provided to uninsured and underserved patients based on a sliding-scale fee schedule which takes into utmost consideration their ability to pay, therefore allowing them to receive necessary health-care that might not otherwise be available to them. The following number of patients were served by each program; medical 17,446, counseling and behavioral health 4,323, and dental 6,415, for a total of 28,184 patients.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 67% 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
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 63
- Transparency & Controls: 79
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 30
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 71.8%; rating input score 72
- Program expense ratio: 63.3%; rating input score 63
- Fundraising efficiency: $5.44 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Compensation committee: Pass
- 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: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
- 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: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -12.8%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.55; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.07; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 19.4%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 5.9% per year; rating input score 100; 45th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 8.8% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 6.5% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 4 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 71.8% of revenue deployed · 63.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $5.6M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $213K · 20 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 34 of 34 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 11 filed money-flow records
- 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.
Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 19/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 11/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 53/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 13/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.