Mary Free Bed Rehabilitation Hospital

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
381359265
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2023
Location
Grand Rapids, MI, USA
Phone
8005288989
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Hospital, Specialty

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$223,161,928
Expenses
$197,073,891
Assets
$274,994,808
Liabilities
$84,919,576

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

Leadership & pay

41 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KENT RIDDLE (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • KENT RIDDLE (CEO): $1,216,897 total reported compensation
  • DR BENJAMIN BRUINSMA MD (CMO): $546,763 total reported compensation
  • DR THOMAS HORDT MD (PHYSICIAN): $498,159 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Restoring hope and freedom through rehabilitation.

What it reported doing in 2024

Rehabilitation staffing and management services; medical services rehabilitation program administration; office expenses for program services; medical records; supplies; utilities, maintenance, depreciation related to program services and assets; patient meals; insurance; driver rehabilitation services; motion analysis/gait lab services; benefit costs and payroll taxes on program salaries not specifically listed; other program services and medical services not specifically listed; bad debts; travel/conferences.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 95% of the money available for current operations came from other operating 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. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 70
  • Transparency & Controls: 77
  • Accountability: 92
  • Sustainability: 62
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 75%; rating input score 75
  • Program expense ratio: 84.8%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 41.3%; rating input score 41; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 32nd 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: 11.7%; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.4; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.31; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3%; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 10.6% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.7% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.8% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 75% of revenue deployed · 84.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 24 of 28 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $167.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1.2M · 41 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $2M reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 34 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 10 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 18 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 16 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

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 — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 41/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 51/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 39/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 55/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.