The Hospice of the Western Reserve Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
863150092
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Cleveland, OH, USA
Phone
8778295500
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$15,664,262
Expenses
$6,424,112
Assets
$18,627,718
Liabilities
$545,511

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LAURA RAYBURN (PRESIDENT OF HWR FOUNDATIO)

Highest reported compensation

  • WILLIAM E FINN (DIRECTOR): $632,953 total reported compensation
  • JEFFREY KOVACS (DIRECTOR & TREASURER): $309,763 total reported compensation
  • LAURA RAYBURN (PRESIDENT OF HWR FOUNDATIO): $241,899 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 foundation has been formed by hospice of the western reserve (hwr) for the purposes of continuing the philanthropic and fundraising activities that have traditionally been undertaken by hwr. As a supporting organization of hwr, the foundation has been formed for the purposes of helping to ensure the financial sustainability of hwr through ambassadorship, advocacy, fundraising, and to establish an endowment for the benefit of hwr and its mission. This will allow hwr to focus on providing hospice care to its patients, while the foundation will focus on fundraising.

What it reported doing in 2024

The foundation has been formed for the purposes of taking the lead in fundraising for hwr. In this respect, the foundation will assume many of the fundraising activities currently engaged in by hwr. These activities include, without limitation: soliciting donations, engaging in planned giving, soliciting government, charities, and foundations for grants, soliciting institutional support from businesses, sponsoring charity drives, galas, dinners, donor events, charity auctions, and outings, including hwr's annual fundraiser, generating mailings, social media and telephone outreach.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 99% 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 voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 48
  • Transparency & Controls: 87
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 86
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 31.7%; rating input score 32
  • Program expense ratio: 77.2%; rating input score 77
  • Fundraising efficiency: $12.36 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 76.9%; rating input score 77; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: 59%; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.9; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.3%; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 150% per year; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 95.9% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 101.6% per year; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 31.7% of revenue deployed · 77.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 13 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $633K · 13 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $327K reported
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 5 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 32/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 44/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.