Sparrow Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
386100687
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Lansing, MI, USA
Phone
5173643620
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Fund Raising and/or Fund Distribution

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$7,583,533
Expenses
$4,790,178
Assets
$40,698,355
Liabilities
$911,508

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

Leadership & pay

37 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • MARGARET DIMOND PHD (REGIONAL PRE): $1,464,110 total reported compensation
  • JAMES DOVER (FORMR PRES/C): $1,087,440 total reported compensation
  • JOSEPH KOCHAN (BOARD MEMBER): $793,950 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 mission of the foundation is to operate for the benefit of and to carry out the purposes of the nonprofit and tax-exempt subsidiaries of umh- sparrow health system, a Michigan nonprofit corporation ("sole member"), and its mission to improve the health of the people in our community by providing quality, compassionate care to everyone, every time.

What it reported doing in 2024

At the umh-sparrow foundation, we foster and create strong community partnerships that help umh-sparrow health system uphold its commitment to providing exceptional care close to home, no matter lifes circumstances. For more than 60 years, the umh-sparrow foundation has inspired philanthropy to strengthen the health of our communities. With continued growth of umh-sparrow to best meet community needs, the foundation has also grown. Were proud to be the hub of charitable giving for umh-sparrow, working with individual and corporate donors who give to help make vital investments in facilities, equipment, technology, education, programs and resources that support our patients, their families, and our teams delivering care across our hospitals and other sites of care spanning the region. In 2025, funding of these needs was over 2m.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 87% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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 - The filed numbers largely add up and most filed governance safeguards are in place. 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: 53
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 81
  • Sustainability: 78
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 46.9%; rating input score 47
  • Program expense ratio: 50.5%; rating input score 51
  • Fundraising efficiency: $117.56 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 6 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • 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: 82.2%; rating input score 82; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 67.9%; rating input score 68; 11th 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: 36.8%; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 8.5; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 26.4%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.9% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.1% per year; rating input score 100; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.9% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 46.9% of revenue deployed · 50.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 19 of 28 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $2.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1.5M · 37 people listed · 6 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 31 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 15 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 35 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 47/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 51/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.