Kishwaukee Physician Group Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
651293967
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2014
Forms available
Form 990 2014, Form 990-N 2010
Location
Dekalb, IL, USA
Phone
8157561521
Rating
54
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Eye Diseases, Blindness and Vision Impairments

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$26,498,171
Expenses
$12,548,899
Assets
$20,104,004
Liabilities
$4,319,879

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

Leadership & pay

21 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KEVIN POORTEN (PRESIDENT & CEO, KISHHEALTH SYSTEM)

Highest reported compensation

  • KEVIN POORTEN (PRESIDENT & CEO, KISHHEALTH SYSTEM): $1,002,496 total reported compensation
  • AZEEM HALEEM MD (DIRECTOR, PHYSICIAN, UROLOGY): $541,315 total reported compensation
  • MICHAEL KULISZ DO (DIRECTOR, CHIEF MEDICAL OFFICER): $540,989 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Kishwaukee physician group exists as one of the area's leading physician groups, providing health care to all area residents. All care given is characterized by excellence and innovation with the goal of keeping our communities healthy.

What it reported doing in 2014

Kishwaukee physician's group (kpg) was established to provide high quality health care to patients at a reasonable cost. Kpg also provides the community with education activities related to the promotion of health and participates in activities such as preventative screenings and health clinics intended to promote the general health of the members of the community. Medical services are provided in a nondiscriminatory manner, including medicare and medicaid patients, and to low-income patients pursuant to the organization's charity care policy. All of these activites are intended to serve and improve the community via reduced health care costs, improved access to physicians and expanded healthcare resources.

Operating model

Revenue model
Affiliate-supported. 78% of the money available for current operations came from contributions from related organizations.
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

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 47
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 37
  • Sustainability: 71
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 37%; rating input score 37
  • Program expense ratio: 78%; rating input score 78
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 8.3%; rating input score 8; 6th 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: 52.6%; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.6; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.21; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 22.3%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 66.1% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 124.1% per year; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 110.5% per year; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 37% of revenue deployed · 78% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 1 of 12 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $9.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1M · 21 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $871K reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2012 to 2014
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 8 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 13 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 37/100.
  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 8/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.