Providence Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
630915493
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Mobile, AL, USA
Phone
2514607616
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$603,897
Expenses
$223,034
Assets
$10,608,707
Liabilities
$29,908

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

Leadership & pay

23 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • BRANDON MICHAEL WILLIAMS (FORMER OFFIC): $1,020,859 total reported compensation
  • JALIMA TRANK (CFO, MINISTR): $1,003,730 total reported compensation
  • MARGARET MURRAY SULLIVAN (PRINCIPAL OF): $415,309 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

We commit ourselves to serving all persons, with special attention to those who are poor and vulnerable. Providence hospital is dedicated to providing care which sustains and improves the health of individuals and communities. We are advocates for a compassionate and just society through our actions and our words.

What it reported doing in 2024

Providence foundation is a not-for-profit, philanthropic organization established in 1985 to solicit and invest contributions, gifts, and bequests on the behalf of providence hospital, so that they may develop and expand their services to mobile, Alabama and the surrounding area. Providence foundation supports the mission of providence hospital through community donations as well as fundraising events. The foundation holds several fundraising events of which the proceeds are designated to different areas of need at providence each year. The foundation supports the hospital by providing assistance with capital needs such as building renovations and medical equipment. Assistance is also provided to patient services, charity care, outreach programs, and support groups.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 66% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 89% 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: 62
  • Transparency & Controls: 72
  • Accountability: 83
  • Sustainability: 83
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 63.2%; rating input score 63
  • Program expense ratio: 63.5%; rating input score 64
  • Fundraising efficiency: $16.69 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 26th 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; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 89.5%; rating input score 89; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Limited
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 63.1%; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 47.57; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 83.5%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.1% per year; rating input score 0; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.4% per year; rating input score 100; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.3% per year; rating input score 100; 27th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 63.2% of revenue deployed · 63.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 17 of 19 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $142K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1M · 23 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 26 of 27 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 11 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 54/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.