Third Street Community Clinic
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 341753919
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2012–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
- Location
- Mansfield, OH, USA
- Phone
- 4195226191
- Rating
- 76
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $33,498,931
- Expenses
- $32,946,590
- Assets
- $21,590,724
- Liabilities
- $9,114,687
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
32 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- AMBER WERTMAN (PRESIDENT / CHAIR)
- PEGGY ANDERSON (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)
Highest reported compensation
- CARLOS MOLINA ARRIOLA (Medical Director - Psych): $423,537 total reported compensation
- DR SHENG LIU (Collaborating Physician): $330,317 total reported compensation
- PEGGY ANDERSON (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $266,199 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Third street community clinic (dba third street family health services) is a community health center with a mission to deliver comprehensive health and wellness care, accessible to all in the communities we serve in ashland, crawford, marion, and richland counties.
What it reported doing in 2024
Third street family health services provided medical, dental and behavioral health services to a total of 24,731 patients during its fiscal year ended december 31, 2024. These patients made a total of 16,202 visits to the clinic's dental facility during 2024; 93,182 visits to the clinic's medical facilities during 2024 for medical, behavioral health services, obgyn services. This includes virtual visits. The organization has 11 sites.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Other-operating. 71% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
- 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.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some related-organization disclosures are missing and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 69
- Transparency & Controls: 71
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 33
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 77.2%; rating input score 77
- Program expense ratio: 78.5%; rating input score 79
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 10th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Pass
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: No; rating input score 0
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th 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: 1.6%; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.66; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.42; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 8.1%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 9.8% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 10.3% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 13.8% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 77.2% of revenue deployed · 78.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 16 of 16 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $25.9M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $424K · 32 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $331K reported
- Consistency: 44 of 45 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, executive pay, and related organizations
- Filing history: 12 filing years from 2012 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 11 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 2 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.
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 — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 41/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 22/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 29/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 35/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.