Sunshine Memorial Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
460731709
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2017
Forms available
Form 990 2017
Location
Grand Forks, ND, USA
Phone
7017382462
Rating
54
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Private Grantmaking Foundations

Reported finances

Revenue
$706,997
Expenses
$219,273
Assets
$2,625,824
Liabilities
$943

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • THERESA GARBE (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • THERESA GARBE (CEO): $80,510 total reported compensation
  • DONOVAN B LARSON (ARCHITECTURAL MANAGER): $53,106 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To support the development and implementation of programs and projects locally and throughout the united states that focus on providing education and resources in areas of health, wellness, and hiker awareness.

What it reported doing in 2017

The foundation's main effort in 2017 continued towards solving a community need and the impact it will have, sunshine hospitality home. The focus areas of those foundation efforts was within an approximate 150-mile radius from grand forks, North Dakota. The foundation created 8 regional focused fundraising teams in addition to the multiple local community teams, through advocacy. Those teams raised $528,648 of the $825,000 goal they set for themselves for 2017-2018. Combining the regional and local community fundraising, the foundation was able to bring the project within 99% of the total project costs.the sunshine hospitality home project provides a home away from home for patients and their families, in the red river valley region, who must travel to grand forks, nd to fulfill their healthcare needs. The hospitality home will have the ability to serve 12,000 to 20,000 people a year and have 14 overnight rooms with 8 community rooms on the main level for those families to find comfort, care and compassion as they seek care for themselves or their loved ones.through fostering critical partnerships, and developing funding relationships, the foundation has since secured the funding and pledges to move forward. As of the summer of 2017, the project entered the construction phase with the anticipated grand opening in the summer of 2018. The home will support all ages, all medical conditions and all providers in the community.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. 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: 21
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 72
  • Sustainability: 83
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 9.7%; rating input score 10
  • Program expense ratio: 30.4%; rating input score 30
  • Fundraising efficiency: $12.76 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: No; rating input score 0
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 69%; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 11.98; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 60.9%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 26.4% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 35.6% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 61.2% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 9.7% of revenue deployed · 30.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 3 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $67K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $81K · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 23 of 23 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2013 to 2017
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 10/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 30/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Major donor itemization scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 49/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.