Rush Copley Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
363093877
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Aurora, IL, USA
Phone
6309786200
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,457,031
Expenses
$2,607,596
Assets
$64,858,124
Liabilities
$28,487,722

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

Leadership & pay

28 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • John Diederich MA MBA FACHE (President & CEO/Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • John Diederich MA MBA FACHE (President & CEO/Director): $1,351,452 total reported compensation
  • Carl T Bergetz JD (Chief Legal Officer, RUSH & Board Secretary, RCF (START 11/24)): $1,335,342 total reported compensation
  • Gaurav Shah MD START 924 (CHIEF OF STAFF/DIRECTOR): $1,113,686 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To inspire philanthropic support for rush copley medical center and other related/controlled exempt entities to advance healthcare and health to the community we serve.

What it reported doing in 2024

Rush copley foundation ("rcf") solicits contributions to support healthcare activities in the aurora, il area including, but not limited to, those of copley memorial hospital. Rcf focuses on supporting programs which provide or improve: access to care, patient & community education, training for our health professionals and patient care improvement at rush copley medical center (rcmc) examples of programs completely supported by rcf include waterford place center resource center, a movement disorders program and the fox valley heart fund. Rcmc is proud to offer these programs free of charge to patients and participants. Rcf solicits and receives gifts and contributions for and on behalf of rcmc and other charitable organizations exempt from taxation under sections 501(a) or 501(c)(3) of the internal revenue code controlled by or affiliated with rcmc; and to support the charitable programs and activities of such organizations through expenditure of such funds received. During the pandemic, rcf served as a conduit for community support of contributions of dollars, food, ppe and other gifts directed in the support and wellness of frontline caregivers at rcmc.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 76
  • Accountability: 85
  • Sustainability: 42
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 99.1%; rating input score 99
  • Program expense ratio: 74.4%; rating input score 74
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 90%; rating input score 90; 21st 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: -6.1%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 24.87; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.44; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 16.8%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 12.8% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.9% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.2% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 99.1% of revenue deployed · 74.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 18 of 20 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1.4M · 28 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 16 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.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 18/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 16/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 24/100.