Pella Hospital Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
421430122
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Pella, IA, USA
Phone
6416283150
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and/or Fund Distribution

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,947,278
Expenses
$1,299,970
Assets
$7,823,566
Liabilities
$13,744

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MIKE MONTGOMERY (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • MARK VAN ROEKEL (PRESIDENT)
  • ROBERT KROESE (CEO, PELLA REGIONAL HEALTH CENTER)

Highest reported compensation

  • ROBERT KROESE (CEO, PELLA REGIONAL HEALTH CENTER): $510,626 total reported compensation
  • DR ELIZABETH WOOSTER PIERSON (DIRECTOR): $270,502 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To support pella regional health center in its mission to provide healthcare and healing services with christian compassion

What it reported doing in 2024

The pella hospital foundation was established in 1994 to support pella regional health center in its mission to provide healthcare and healing services with christian compassion. With our storied history, the strength and stability that we have built ensures a bright and promising long-term future, not only for the foundation itself, but also for the people we serve. From seniors who need a little help to continue living independently, to newborns who are dependent on many; from adults battling chronic disease, to youngsters benefiting from our educational offerings, we strive to reach every generation in every community we serve.see schedule o for more information about the legacy society.the legacy society, a select group of friends of the hospital, is growing in members. Beginning in 2006, a group of individuals who shared a vision for the hospital and actively participated financially in achieving this goal were recognized for their significant contributions. It is an exciting time to become part of the pella regional legacy that will impact and lead healthcare in the surrounding areas for many years to come.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 86% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 98% of its reported program spending out as grants.

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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 79
  • Transparency & Controls: 67
  • Accountability: 83
  • Sustainability: 80
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 83.8%; rating input score 84
  • Program expense ratio: 98.2%; rating input score 98
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 16th 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: 93.9%; rating input score 94; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 33.2%; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 6.02; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8.2%; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 18.4% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.6% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.1% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 83.8% of revenue deployed · 98.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 8 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $511K · 9 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 17 of 18 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 2 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 43/100.