The Center at Sierra Health Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
455282243
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Sacramento, CA, United States
Phone
916.993.7701 (Sacramento office) / 559.992.0670 (San Joaquin Valley office)
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public Health Program (Includes General Health and Wellness Promotion Services)

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$197,493,248
Expenses
$202,627,122
Assets
$203,213,833
Liabilities
$171,153,517

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CHET P HEWITT (PRESIDENT & CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • CHET P HEWITT (PRESIDENT & CEO): $612,730 total reported compensation
  • EDWARD HARRIS (COO/CFO): $331,011 total reported compensation
  • NANCY P LEE (CHAIR): $23,160 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Every person in California should be able to live a healthy life. With strategy, creativity and ongoing collaboration, The Center strives to eradicate health inequities across the state, especially within the underserved San Joaquin Valley. Operating as an independent 501(c)(3) nonprofit, The Center brings people, ideas and infrastructure together to create a collective impact. The Center helps communities access proven practices while tapping into their existing resources, knowledge and creativity to identify strategies for a healthier community. Leveraging leadership, operational and funding support from Sierra Health Foundation and its partners, The Center establishes investment partnerships with public and private funders, community members, community organizations, nonprofits, businesses, and national, state and local government agencies. Taken together, each partner’s unique...

What it reported doing in 2024

California state opioid funding programthe state opioid funding program addresses the opioid epidemic by supporting the department of health care services (dhcs) in implementing various projects of dhcs' opioid response program, including creating expanded substance use disorder (sud) treatment infrastructure, addressing the needs of communities of color and vulnerable populations that are disproportionately impacted by sud, diversion of people with sud from the justice system into treatment, and interventions to prevent drug addiction in vulnerable youth. These projects include expanding mat in state-licensed facilities and/or certified sud and mental health facilities, increasing mat access points, and the increase of medication through mobile narcotic treatment programs and medication units. Through this $113,799,996 contract with dhcs, the state opioid funding program dispersed $20,063,213.60 to 39 organizations in 2024.California overdose prevention and harm reduction initiativethe California overdose prevention and harm reduction initiative (cophri) is a partnership between the center at sierra health foundation and the California department of public health that supports low-barrier, nonjudgmental, public health-focused harm reduction services through 68 community-based nonprofits, clinics, and local health departments throughout the state. To date, cophri has awarded $36,659,694 to promote health and safety for people who use drugs, including safer drug injection and smoking services, overdose prevention education and naloxone access, HIV and viral hepatitis services, access to medications for opioid use disorder and other substance use disorder care, and a wide range of social and health care services. Youth suicide prevention media and outreach campaign program youth suicide prevention media and outreach campaign program is a statewide program focused on youth suicide prevention. With funding from the California department of public health (cdph) from may 2023 to june 2025, our 33 program partners worked to prevent suicide among some of California's most marginalized youth who are disproportionately impacted by suicide and self-harm behavior. This includes american indian and alaskan native, hispanic and latinx, and african american/black youth, as well as intersectional populations such as youth with mental health conditions and/or substance use issues, those impacted by the foster care system, and two-spirit/lgbtq+ youth. Funded partners hosted 5,131 activities and events, accumulated over 114,000 program interactions with youth, delivered 5,886 messages via mixed media, and had 2.6 million campaign-related social media impressions. Additionally, the center hosted three partner convenings that cumulatively gathered 273 community-based organizations and youth attendees. The center team also facilitated 23 technical assistance webinars and completed 15 partner site visits. Black child legacy campaignthe black child legacy campaign is the community-driven movement established by the steering committee on reduction of african american child deaths in 2015. The campaign focuses on reducing african american child deaths across the top four causes of preventable death: deaths related to child abuse and neglect, third-party homicides, deaths related to perinatal conditions, and infant sleep-related deaths. In 2024, funded partners provided intensive case management to 1,141 african americans, and 3,630 youth participated in black child legacy campaign activities. The black child legacy campaign is funded by the county of sacramento, first 5 sacramento, and the board of state and community corrections and is managed by the center.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 92% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 97% 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. 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: 87
  • Transparency & Controls: 69
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 33
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 99%; rating input score 99
  • Program expense ratio: 96.3%; rating input score 96
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 25th 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; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 34th 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: -2.6%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.84; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0.1%; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 30.1% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 28% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 28.5% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 6 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 99% of revenue deployed · 96.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 8 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $195.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $613K · 9 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $10.1M reported
  • Consistency: 28 of 29 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 80 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 82 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 17/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 40/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 16/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.