Pemiscot Memorial Health Systems
Legal name: Pemiscot County Memorial Hospital
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 436004544
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2018
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2018
- Location
- Hayti, MO, US
- Phone
- 573-359-3686
- Rating
- 77
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Hospital, General
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $42,371,229
- Expenses
- $42,298,995
- Assets
- $28,407,411
- Liabilities
- $17,216,476
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
13 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JAMES MARSHALL (CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- ABDULLAH ARSHAD (PHYSICIAN): $898,020 total reported compensation
- BABATUNDE OLADIRAN (PHYSICIAN): $601,263 total reported compensation
- LARA HUFFMAN (PHYSICIAN): $325,000 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Pemiscot Memorial Health Systems is committed to provide an organized system of healthcare services to all persons within our service area without regard to age, sex, race, color, national origin, creed, financial status, physical or mental challenge. Demand for expansion of existing or initiation of new programs and services are evaluated on an ongoing basis resulting in incremental improvements in the degree of quality of services rendered in direct response to the changing healthcare needs of the community. Pemiscot Memorial Health Systems strives to work in collaboration with local, state and federal organizations to ensure access to primary care for all residents with special emphasis on preventative health and wellness. We diligently work to maintain our financial strength in order that we remain a prominent provider of medical services for the region.
What it reported doing in 2018
Providing quality health care to the community through the operation of a hospital, long-term care facility, rural health clinics and adult and geriatric psychiatric units.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 98% 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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and program spending has declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 84
- Transparency & Controls: 79
- Accountability: 86
- Sustainability: 32
- Growth: 20
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 94.4%; rating input score 94
- Program expense ratio: 94.7%; rating input score 95
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Pass
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- 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; 67th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 0.2%; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.67; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.61; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 5.8%; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -2.3% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -1% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 8.2% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 13 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 94.4% of revenue deployed · 94.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $40M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $898K · 13 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $3.9M reported
- Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 9 filing years from 2010 to 2018
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 8 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
- 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.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 9 not reported.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 34/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 31/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 25/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 35/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.