Mercy Medical Center - Sioux City Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
141880022
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Mason City, IA, USA
Phone
5153589200
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and/or Fund Distribution

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$77,192
Expenses
$79,764
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • THOMAS CLARK (DIR & PRES WEST IOWA REGION THR 7/25): $527,978 total reported compensation
  • JESICA HANSON (VP FINANCE MERCYONE SIOUXLAND): $249,697 total reported compensation
  • TRACY FEATHERS (DIR & CHIEF DEVLOP OFFICER THR 7/25): $77,157 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

We, mercy health services-Iowa and trinity health, serve together in the spirit of the gospel as a compassionate and transforming healing presence within our communities.mercy medical center - sioux city foundation is a member of mercy health services-Iowa and trinity health.through leadership in giving and community involvement, the mercy medical center - sioux city foundation is advancing the mission of mercyone siouxland medical center to imporve the health of the community.

What it reported doing in 2025

Since 2002, mercy medical center - sioux city foundation has served as the fundraising arm of mercyone siouxland medical center. Donations received and funds generated from annual fundraisers provide mercyone siouxland medical center and its affiliates much needed funds to promote health and well-being for the residents of the siouxland communities.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 81% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 86% of its reported program spending out as grants.

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: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 76
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 23
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 94.2%; rating input score 94
  • Program expense ratio: 78.9%; rating input score 79
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5.17 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 39; 39th 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; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Limited
    • 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: -3.3%; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 122.8%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -2.2% per year; rating input score 0; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -4% per year; rating input score 0; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -5.1% per year; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 94.2% of revenue deployed · 78.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $63K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $528K · 15 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 17 filing years from 2009 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 307 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 39/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 3/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 47/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.