Mercy Foundation Bakersfield

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
770201321
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Phoenix, AZ, USA
Phone
6616636700
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$5,345,171
Expenses
$4,126,509
Assets
$55,397,412
Liabilities
$1,950,184

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

Leadership & pay

28 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • HEMMAL KOTHARY MD (FORMER OFFICER (INTERIM FND PRESIDENT))

Highest reported compensation

  • BENJAMIN BJ PREDUM (EX-OFF BM/FND PRES (THRU 11/2024)): $1,119,665 total reported compensation
  • HEMMAL KOTHARY MD (FORMER OFFICER (INTERIM FND PRESIDENT)): $520,920 total reported compensation
  • JOHN HOLBERT (CFO): $503,273 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To provide support to dignity health hospitals in bakersfield ca.

What it reported doing in 2024

The foundation is an irc sec 509(a)(3) supporting organization to dignity health. As a supporting organization, the foundation operates exclusively for the benefit of, or to carry out the purposes of dignity health. Foundation support allows the hospital to further its mission by making the healing presence of god known in our world by improving the health of the people we serve, especially those who are vulnerable, while we advance social justice for all.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • 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 fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 75
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 78
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 79.1%; rating input score 79
  • Program expense ratio: 80.1%; rating input score 80
  • Fundraising efficiency: $9.55 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 22.8%; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 13.42; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8%; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.4% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.6% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 14% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 79.1% of revenue deployed · 80.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 21 of 24 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $3.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1.1M · 28 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 336 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.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 36/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 37/100.