Rural Health Network of Monroe Co Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 650474953
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2015–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Key West, FL, USA
- Phone
- 3055176613
- Rating
- 63
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Public Health Program (Includes General Health and Wellness Promotion Services)
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $3,149,777
- Expenses
- $3,476,092
- Assets
- $2,320,776
- Liabilities
- $1,033,559
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
15 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- AMY HALSTEAD (CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- AMY HALSTEAD (CEO): $158,702 total reported compensation
- JOHN VALLILEE (DENTIST): $150,819 total reported compensation
- ARTHUR POWELL (PA): $110,453 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The rural health network of monroe county, Florida, inc. Is a community based, not-for-profit organization that strives to operate a comprehensive, culturally competent, high quality health care center for monroe county, Florida
What it reported doing in 2024
Operationally, the rural health network provides leadership and guidance through joint alliances and partnerships with healthcare entities and professionals in monroe county, Florida. This leads to patient outcomes that exceed their expectations and satisfaction in both the medical and dental arenas.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 61% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- 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 expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 68
- Transparency & Controls: 66
- Accountability: 69
- Sustainability: 18
- Growth: 20
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 79.7%; rating input score 80
- Program expense ratio: 72.2%; rating input score 72
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -10.4%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.67; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.45; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 18.2%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -0.1% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -2% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 2.8% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 79.7% of revenue deployed · 72.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.5M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $159K · 15 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $269K reported
- Consistency: 23 of 23 current checks pass
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes executive pay
- Filing history: 7 filing years from 2015 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 5 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.
- High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 13/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 24/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 14/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 24/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.