Rural Health Leadership and Education Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
452222941
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2023
Location
Kansas City, MO, USA
Phone
8167563140
Rating
55
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Reported finances

Revenue
$284,283
Expenses
$67,671
Assets
$699,111
Liabilities
$22,522

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MARCIA BRAND (PRESIDENT/CH)

Highest reported compensation

  • ALAN E MORGAN (BOARD MEMBER): $541,969 total reported compensation
  • ROBERT G MCVAY (BOARD MEMBER): $285,102 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The foundation was created to elevate aspiring rural health leaders by reinforcing supported programs that educate rural health professionals on best practices, both in rural facilities and in Washington dc.

What it reported doing in 2025

The national rural health foundation (nrhf) worked closely with nrha in 2024 to update and expand the training offered by the rural health fellows program, a year-long leadership development program geared specifically toward rural health professionals looking to take on expanded roles within their communities. Updates to the program came from suggestions made by program alumni and included integrating more media training, discussion topics, and a diversified group of expert speakers. Working with nrha and the rural research policy institute (rupri), nrhf contributed to the "the future of rural health: a summit of thought leaders" event in november 2024. During this meeting, rural health experts discussed medicare and medicaid payment, workforce shortages, public health, the role of technology, and integrated behavioral health.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 92% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 85% 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

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 36
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 65
  • Sustainability: 76
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 18%; rating input score 18
  • Program expense ratio: 47.8%; rating input score 48
  • Fundraising efficiency: $189.8 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • 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: 80%; rating input score 80; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 76.2%; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 10.33; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 118.8%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -97% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 23.1% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 18.3% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 18% of revenue deployed · 47.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 10 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $32K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $542K · 10 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 17 of 17 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2012 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 18/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 48/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 31/100.