Kishwaukee Community Hospital

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237087041
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2014
Forms available
Form 990 2014
Location
Dekalb, IL, USA
Phone
8157561521
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Hospital, General

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$186,405,155
Expenses
$184,640,562
Assets
$328,357,441
Liabilities
$104,853,366

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KEVIN POORTEN (PRESIDENT & CEO, KISHHEALTH SYSTEM)
  • BRAD COPPLE (PRESIDENT - KH & VWH)

Highest reported compensation

  • KEVIN POORTEN (PRESIDENT & CEO, KISHHEALTH SYSTEM): $1,002,496 total reported compensation
  • DR MICHAEL KULISZ (CHIEF MEDICAL OFFICER): $540,989 total reported compensation
  • BRAD COPPLE (PRESIDENT - KH & VWH): $436,867 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To provide comprehensive health care services, including inpatient acute and nonacute care, and various outpatient services in the area of dekalb county. Kishwaukee hospital (kh) serves all people with skill and compassion while respecting their dignity, rights, and choices by offering access to high-quality preventive, curative, and rehabilitative care delivered in a cost effective manner. Kishwaukee hospital recognizes the need to effectively manage resources for present and future generations.

What it reported doing in 2014

Kishwaukee hospital (kh), located in dekalb, Illinois, serves the residents of dekalb county and the surrounding areas by offering a number of programs and services for community benefit, including charity care.kishwaukee hospital believes that in order to be a true community hospital, we must be a resource for preventative and curative health information, education and services and that we must support the efforts of others who also are doing work for the community good. Doing so helps build trust, respect and loyalty for our hospital and strengthens our role as a partner in improving the health our citizens and the quality of life in the communities we serve.the community benefit objectives of kishwaukee hospital include programs to improve access to health services by reducing geographic, financial, language, and cultural barriers improve and enhance public health, advance general health knowledge, and relieve the government burden of providing health services for the community, and for the uninsured and underinsured. Community health needs are identified and addressed through community outreach programs, by adding new services and by expanding others. Needs also are met through operational programs such as charity care, subsidized services and providing cash and in-kind donations to support organizations that also strive to meet community health and quality of life needs. The hospital identifies community health needs in several ways.*american diabetes association*american medical association*american university survey*centers for disease control and prevention*community needs index*Illinois department of employment security*Illinois department of public health*Illinois department of public health annual hospital questionnaire*Illinois department of public health, behavioral risk factors survey*Illinois department of public health, Illinois county cancer statistics review incidence*Illinois department of public health: birth defects and other adverse pregnancy outcomes in Illinois, 2004-2008*Illinois hospital association*Illinois hospital association, comp data*Illinois public health community map*national cancer institute*national cancer for health statistics*national heart lung and blood institute*northern Illinois university enrollment data*pioneering healthier communities*state of Illinois data by zip code*us census bureau 2010 data*internal review of outpatient and inpatient trends, especially emergency department usage*input from other community providers. This includes providing hospital leaders to serve on boards and committees that directly or indirectly impact the community health or help the hospital connect to underserved or vulnerable populations.using all these resources, the hospital focused on the following community health needs in fiscal year 2015.expand kish physician group (kpg) primary care providers in identified service areas.goal: provide greater access to care in the communities we serve, while utilizing the latest technology, equipment and education to provide the highest level of care.- during the course of the fiscal year, kish physician group expanded services to two additional locations including aurora and dekalb and added thirty new providers. The addition of providers includes the acquisition of the dekalb clinic providers which took place on march 2, 2015. Throughout the fiscal year there was approximately a 70% increase in the number of patient visits.define and identify opportunities for care coordination, disease management, chronic care programs, group medical visits and other innovative healthcare delivery options.goal: provide patient-centered approach to health care delivery.- during the past year much work has taken place to define and identify opportunities for care coordination, as kish health system employees work to develop a model which places the focus on the patient. Additionally, the teams working on this action item are focused on reducing readmissions for patients diagnos

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 95% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 85% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 72
  • Accountability: 72
  • Sustainability: 51
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 80.1%; rating input score 80
  • Program expense ratio: 82.9%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: $84.18 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 15th 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: 99.3%; rating input score 99; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 0.9%; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.78; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.32; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0.8%; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 14.6% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.7% per year; rating input score 100; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.3% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 80.1% of revenue deployed · 82.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 3 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $153M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1M · 17 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $26.3M reported
  • Consistency: 35 of 36 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 10 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2010 to 2014
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 24 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 32 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 33/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.