Palacios Community Medical Center

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
760698013
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2018
Forms available
Form 990 2018
Location
Palacios, TX, USA
Phone
3619722511
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Hospital, General

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$6,002,267
Expenses
$6,094,682
Assets
$2,647,218
Liabilities
$531,618

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BARBARA K HAYES (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • STEPHEN RICKS (FNP): $262,512 total reported compensation
  • JOE VASQUEZ (FNP): $120,728 total reported compensation
  • CLAUDE MANNING (CFO): $116,185 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To provide accessible quality healthcare services to the people of the community and surrounding area, to promote the best opportunity for recovery of good health and to assure the continued viability of the hospital through planning and sound fiscal management.

What it reported doing in 2018

The organization is a community owned hospital dedicated to providing accessbile quality healthcare to the citizens of palacios, Texas and the surrounding area. It offers 24-hour emergency room services and is a 17 bed critical access hospital providing inpatient and outpatient services including laboratory, radiology, phyical therapy, social, and pharmacy services. During 2018, it provided 244 inpatient days of care, 229 swing bed days of care and 96 observation days of care. It had 6,711 outpatient visits.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 85% 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 most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 66
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 26
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 75%; rating input score 75
  • Program expense ratio: 73.9%; rating input score 74
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • 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: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -1.5%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.43; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.2; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 14.3%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -3.8% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.5% per year; rating input score 0; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13.8% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 75% of revenue deployed · 73.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $4.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $263K · 17 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $304K reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2013 to 2018
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 8 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 27/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 19/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 16/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 49/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.