Mission Hospice & Home Care Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
942567162
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
San Mateo, CA, USA
Phone
6505541000
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Hospices

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$14,367,027
Expenses
$16,984,674
Assets
$10,140,928
Liabilities
$4,610,012

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

Leadership & pay

33 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SKELLY WINGARD (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)
  • ANTHONY LUPIAN (SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT, SOUTH MARKET)
  • DOLORES MILLER (FORMER CEO (THRU 5/2024))

Highest reported compensation

  • SKELLY WINGARD (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $795,243 total reported compensation
  • JAMES KELLY (CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $348,224 total reported compensation
  • ALEXANDER IGNACIO (CHIEF ADMIN OFFICER (THRU 3/2025)): $232,652 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Delivering compassionate support and exceptional care in the home for individuals and communities, guiding them with choice and dignity to navigate significant care decisions.

What it reported doing in 2024

The corporation provides a suite of programs including mission house, hospice services, counseling, bereavement support, and community education programs that together offer a "continuum of care" in a home-based environment in san mateo, santa clara, and san francisco counties.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 87% 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 - 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: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 76
  • Accountability: 92
  • Sustainability: 13
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 94.9%; rating input score 95
  • Program expense ratio: 80.1%; rating input score 80
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4.9 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 94.7%; rating input score 95; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: -18.2%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.6; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.45; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12.8%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.1% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.4% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.2% per year; rating input score 100; 30th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 94.9% of revenue deployed · 80.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 18 of 19 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $13.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $795K · 33 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 4 contractors listed · $637K reported
  • Consistency: 35 of 35 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 12 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 3 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 20/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 5/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 20/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: CEO compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 12/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 32/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.