Mission Health Services
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 742561471
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Salt Lake City, UT, USA
- Phone
- 8019224800
- Rating
- 66
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Nursing, Convalescent Facilities
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $19,396,316
- Expenses
- $16,079,542
- Assets
- $39,324,031
- Liabilities
- $8,546,314
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
10 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- EDDIE KEELE (CEO)
- BRENDA BARTHOLOMEW (CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- EDDIE KEELE (CEO): $534,117 total reported compensation
- MICHELLE ZIMBELMAN (CFO): $298,473 total reported compensation
- ZACHARY WOOTTON (COO): $250,408 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Mission health services operates five skilled nursing centers, four assisted living centers and one intermediate nursing care facility for long-term care services, rehabilitation, and care for those individuals with disabilities. Currently, mhs employs over 500 utahans who work and care for the frail, elderly, and those with special needs. Mhs has a strong commitment to build and strengthen a sense of community through support for each other and among residents, staff and volunteers.
What it reported doing in 2024
Mission health services (mhs) operates five skilled nursing centers, four assisted living centers, and one intermediate nursing care facility for long-term care services, rehabilitation, and care for those individuals with disabilities. In 2024 mhs added both home health and hospice care as additional services. Mhs provided unpaid care to indigents, waived unreimbursed medicaid costs and other gifts to the community valued at approximately 772,713, which is neither reported on page 1 nor disclosed elsewhere in the return.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 89% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and program spending has declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 62
- Transparency & Controls: 94
- Accountability: 32
- Sustainability: 67
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 63.4%; rating input score 63
- Program expense ratio: 80.6%; rating input score 81
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 6 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Pass
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
- Written employment contract: Pass
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 3rd 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: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Fail
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 17.1%; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.45; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.22; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 8.3%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -3.7% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 0.2% per year; rating input score 100; 9th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 9.2% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 63.4% of revenue deployed · 80.6% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 0 of 10 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $13M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $534K · 10 people listed · 6 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $501K reported
- Consistency: 27 of 28 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 8 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 4 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.
- High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D land buildings reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 28/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 56/100.