Valley View Hospital Womens Auxiliary

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
846037681
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2010–2017
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2017
Location
Glenwood Springs, CO, USA
Phone
9709456535
Rating
86
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Reported finances

Revenue
$42,762
Expenses
$55,137
Assets
$73,942
Liabilities
$1,495

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SHARON ANDERSON (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • ANGELA PARKISON (RECORDING SECRETARY)
  • DEBBIE LUNDIN (2ND RECORDING SECRETARY)
  • JAN KAUFMAN (GIFT SHOP MANAGER/PRESIDEN)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

To support valley view hospital in equipment acquisition, patient comfort and scholarships.

What it reported doing in 2017

Patient comfort - to make the hospital stay less difficult for the patient and their loved ones. Approximately 11,000 volunteer hours

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 100% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filed totals do not add up and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 97
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 35
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 90.7%; rating input score 91

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -28.9%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.34; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -3.1% per year; rating input score 0; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.4% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.2% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 90.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $50K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2010 to 2017
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 17/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 56/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 35/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.