St Vincent Mercy Hospital Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
311066871
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2022
Forms available
Form 990 2022
Location
St Louis, MO, USA
Phone
3147338000
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Hospital, General

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$23,412
Expenses
$117,253
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

St. Vincent Mercy Hospital Foundation, Inc. supports the charitable programs of St. Vincent Madison County Health System, Inc. in pursuit of its mission: "Rooted in the loving ministry of Jesus as healer, we commit ourselves to serving all persons with special attention to those who are poor and vulnerable. Our Catholic health ministry is dedicated to spiritually centered, holistic care, which sustains and improves the health of individuals and communities. We are advocates for a compassionate and just society through our actions and our words."

What it reported doing in 2022

THE FILING ORGANIZATION IS A PART OF THE ASCENSION CATHOLIC HEALTH MINISTRY. ASCENSION IS A FAITH-BASED HEALTHCARE ORGANIZATION THAT DELIVERS PERSONALIZED, COMPASSIONATE CARE TO ALL, ESPECIALLY TO THOSE WHO NEED IT THE MOST. St. Vincent Mercy Foundation was founded by community business leaders in 1983 with a mission to engage the community in philanthropic support of the hospital. Support to St. Vincent Mercy Foundation enables us to support new medical equipment needs, facility enhancements; medical education; and scholarships. Gifts can be made for current use or endowment building, and can be directed to virtually any hospital area. All donations to St. Vincent Mercy Foundation remain at the local ministry to better St. Vincent Mercy Hospital, our patients, associates and community. With the help and support of our donors, we truly make a difference.

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.

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: 78
  • Transparency & Controls: 76
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 6
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 68.2%; rating input score 68
  • 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; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Limited
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -400.8%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 185.9%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -16.8% per year; rating input score 0; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -9.6% per year; rating input score 0; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.2% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 68.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 12 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $80K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $418K · 16 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 19 of 19 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2009 to 2022
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 398 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 11/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 2/100.