Mayo Clinic

Legal name: Poverello Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
411494881
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2014
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2014
Location
Rochester, MN, USA
Phone
5075381297
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Religion Related N.E.C.
Affiliation
Religious (unspecified)

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,545,538
Expenses
$1,475,194
Assets
$38,467,547
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • GERVAIS SISTER GENEROSE (DIRECTOR/PRESIDENT)
  • TIGHE SISTER MOIRA (DIRECTOR/VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • HAEFLINGER RICKY J (TOP FINANCIAL OFFICER): $681,353 total reported compensation
  • FREDERICK BARBARA L (DIRECTOR): $259,157 total reported compensation
  • ZAHASKY PAUL E (DIRECTOR): $219,092 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To benefit, perform the functions of, or to carry out the charitable, educational, and scientific purposes of mayo clinic hospital-- rochester.

What it reported doing in 2014

Grants allocated to mayo clinic hospital-- rochester to pay for hospital services provided to patients unable to afford their own care. During 2014, 554 patients were assisted through these grant allocations.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 61% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% 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: 78
  • Transparency & Controls: 72
  • Accountability: 69
  • Sustainability: 84
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 80.8%; rating input score 81
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 10th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 62.5%; rating input score 62; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 42%; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 26.08; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 23.3%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 10.1% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 15.6% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.8% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: Mission, programs, and operating context captured from the official website.
  • Where the money goes: 80.8% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 8 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $681K · 9 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 15 of 17 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2010 to 2014
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 59 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 9 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 6/100.