HospiceCare
Legal name: Kanawha Hospice Care Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 341337316
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Charleston, WV, US
- Phone
- 304-768-8523
- Rating
- 79
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Standard
- Sector
- Hospices
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $26,775,662
- Expenses
- $27,635,876
- Assets
- $25,399,120
- Liabilities
- $7,257,520
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
27 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- H DILL BATTLE (PRESIDENT)
- MICHAEL BUMGARNER (VICE-PRESIDENT)
- J RYAN LINDSAY (IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT)
- CHRISTOPHER RAWLINGS (CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- CHRISTOPHER RAWLINGS (CEO): $348,106 total reported compensation
- DARRELL BOGGESS DO (CHIEF MEDICAL DIRECTOR): $327,560 total reported compensation
- AMY LEE WIRTS MD (HOSPICE PHYSICIAN): $283,818 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Providing compassionate care and affirming life through hospice, palliative and other supportive care services to the patients, families and communities we serve.
What it reported doing in 2024
To affirm life by committing to enhance the lives of individuals with a life-limiting illness by providing compassionate hospice care services to patients at hubbard hospice house, hubbard hospice house west, peyton hospice house and camc hospicecare.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 93% 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: 80
- Transparency & Controls: 68
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 29
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 88.3%; rating input score 88
- Program expense ratio: 86.5%; rating input score 87
- Fundraising efficiency: $3.99 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 88.2%; rating input score 88; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
- Compensation committee: Missing
- 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: No; rating input score 0
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: -3.2%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.92; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.29; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 6.5%; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 2% per year; rating input score 100; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 1.8% per year; rating input score 100; 16th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 2.2% per year; rating input score 100; 19th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 7 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 16 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 88.3% of revenue deployed · 86.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 20 of 20 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $23.9M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $348K · 27 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $453K reported
- Consistency: 34 of 36 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 7 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
- 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: Fundraising efficiency scored 16/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 20/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 33/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 39/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 48/100.