Mercy Medical Center of Oshkosh Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
390806268
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2017
Forms available
Form 990 2017
Location
Oshkosh, WI, USA
Phone
3147338000
Rating
54
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Hospital, General

Reported finances

Revenue
$88,188,701
Expenses
$88,557,760
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Our mission as part of a catholic health care system is to further the healing ministry of jesus by continually improving the health and well-being of all people, especially the poor, in the communities we serve.

What it reported doing in 2017

Mercy Medical Center of Oshkosh, Inc. is a 109-bed hospital campus providing services without regard to patient race, creed, national origin, economic status, or ability to pay. As of 05/31/2018, Mercy Medical Center of Oshkosh, Inc. treated 7,016 adults and children for a total of 26,113 patient days of service. The hospital also provided services for 107,371 outpatient visits, which included 4,715 outpatient surgeries and 14,444 Emergency Room Visits. See Schedule H for a non-exhaustive list of community benefit programs and descriptions.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 100% 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

MIXED - Most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 51
  • Transparency & Controls: 59
  • Accountability: 75
  • Sustainability: 18
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 57.4%; rating input score 57
  • Program expense ratio: 57.2%; rating input score 57
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 10th 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: 78.6%; rating input score 79; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: No; rating input score 0
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 80%; rating input score 80; 30th 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: -0.4%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.3%; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -12.3% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -3.6% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -17.1% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 57.4% of revenue deployed · 57.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 10 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $50.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1.7M · 18 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $5.1M reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 32 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2009 to 2017
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 60 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 57/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 57/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Major donor itemization scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 22/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.