Shasta Community Health Center
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 680165855
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
- Location
- Redding, CA, US
- Phone
- (530) 246-5710
- Rating
- 89
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Standard
- Sector
- Ambulatory Health Center, Community Clinic
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $78,964,332
- Expenses
- $77,716,366
- Assets
- $110,513,810
- Liabilities
- $38,781,875
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
33 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- C DEAN GERMANO (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER END 03/24)
- J BRANDON THORNOCK (COO END / CEO BEG 03/24)
Highest reported compensation
- C DEAN GERMANO (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER END 03/24): $685,098 total reported compensation
- DARRICK NELSON MD (CHIEF MEDICAL OFFICER): $447,301 total reported compensation
- MELISSA TASISTA (MEDICAL DIRECTOR): $438,826 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Our leadership team consists of experienced and dedicated professionals who share our mission, vision, and values.
What it reported doing in 2024
Shasta community health center (schc) is a key provider of the health care safety net services in northern California, providing medical, mental health and substance abuse services to 33,496 patients (121,411 visits) in 2024. Schc also has an extensive outreach to the homeless program, services for HIV patients and is one of the few medical resources for the low income populations, especially those with income below 200% of the federal poverty guideline and the uninsured.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Other-operating. 81% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
- 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.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 88
- Transparency & Controls: 89
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 41
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 89.3%; rating input score 89
- Program expense ratio: 91.7%; rating input score 92
- Fundraising efficiency: $35.42 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 28th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
- Written employment contract: Pass
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 77.7%; rating input score 78; 16th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 1.6%; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.42; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.35; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 6.9%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 9.7% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 7.8% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 10.6% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 13 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 4 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 89.3% of revenue deployed · 91.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $71.3M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $685K · 33 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $2.7M reported
- Consistency: 39 of 40 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 10 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 19 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 8 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.
Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 40/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 51/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 50/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.