Parkview Adventist Medical Center

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
010244035
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2014
Forms available
Form 990 2014
Location
Brunswick, ME, USA
Phone
2073732000
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Hospital, General
Affiliation
Christianity

Reported finances

Revenue
$28,256,520
Expenses
$30,724,546
Assets
$13,414,056
Liabilities
$18,646,654

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

19 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Randee Reynolds (President/Board Member)

Highest reported compensation

  • Scott Ewert MD (Physician): $378,089 total reported compensation
  • James Ross MD (Physician): $284,241 total reported compensation
  • Donald Woloszyn MD (Physician): $266,386 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Parkview Adventist Medical Center, in our commitment to the community we serve, exists to reflect the loving compassionate life and work of Jesus Christ, whose total mission was to offer wholeness to people physically, emotionally and spiritually.

What it reported doing in 2014

Community Care - In keeping with PAMC's commitment to serve all members of its community, the medical center also provided a wide range of activities which included wellness programs, community education programs, and special programs for the elderly, handicapped or medically under-served, along with a variety of broad based community support programs. Most of these programs are offered for the cost of materials and professional services only, or at no fee at all as a community service. PAMC's wellness department reflects the shift in healthcare focus from treatment to prevention. The concept of wellness is to make sick people well and to keep well people from getting sick. Research is proving that exercise and proper diet can help reverse many chronic diseases and reduce the use of medication in many illnesses. Health talks have been given to schools, industries, social and civic groups. Health information, counseling, and audiovisuals have been provided to the community.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% 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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 56
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 15
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 94.5%; rating input score 95
  • Program expense ratio: 86.9%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 86.7%; rating input score 87; 1st 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: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: -8.7%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.44; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.39; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.2%; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.2% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -6.9% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -8.1% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 94.5% of revenue deployed · 86.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $26.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $378K · 19 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $5M reported
  • Consistency: 27 of 28 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2010 to 2014
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 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.

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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 8/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 18/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 4/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 45/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.