Murray-calloway County Hospital Auxiliary

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
311051067
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Murray, KY, USA
Phone
2707621100
Rating
90
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Reported finances

Revenue
$59,151
Expenses
$59,864
Assets
$26,150
Liabilities
$44,420

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

People named in this filing

  • JENNIFER REHMUS (GIFT SHOP COORDINATOR)
  • KIM LINDSEY (VOLUNTEER COORDINATOR)
  • KATIE HOOVER (HOSPICE VOLUNTEER COORDINATOR)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

The auxiliary's primary purpose is to support the murray-calloway county hospital. The auxiliary operates the gift shop within the hospital and provides volunteer services.

What it reported doing in 2024

The auxiliary's primary exempt purpose is to support the hospital. The auxiliary operates the gift shop within the hospital and provides volunteer services.

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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 100
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 35
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -1.2%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.44; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.7; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 26.9% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.3% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.3% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $60K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 42/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 27/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 3/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.