Visiting Nurse Association and Hospice Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
592804739
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Vero Beach, FL, USA
Phone
7725675551
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Nonmonetary Support N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$5,274,971
Expenses
$4,118,764
Assets
$39,782,703
Liabilities
$687,922

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

Leadership & pay

19 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Lundy Fields (President/CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • Lundy Fields (President/CEO): $315,940 total reported compensation
  • Daniel Bach (Past CFO): $225,547 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To solicit and raise philanthropic resources in support of the VNA mission to provide compassionate and innovative care of the highest quality for patients and caregivers regardless of their financial status.

What it reported doing in 2024

The majority of the expenses incurred by the foundation relate to the support given to the VNA of the Treasure Coast & its affiliates for home health, hospice & community wellness. These grants fund direct patient home health & hospice care, community wellness clinics, operational support of the VNA hospice house, program initiatives & upgraded technology to enhance efficiency & patient care outcomes. During the tax year, unpaid volunteers contributed more than 1,000 hours of their time in direct support of the Foundation. Volunteers assisted in various program areas. Based upon the hourly volunteer rate of approximately $34.88/hr, the dollar value of those volunteer hours was $34,900. In 2025 for the state of Florida per the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the dollar value of those volunteer hours was approx. $37,500. A total of 20,900 hours of volunteer services valued at $729,000 were provided in total to the foundation and its related parties. No amounts have been reflected in this return for those donated services.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 74% 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 - 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 fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 64
  • Transparency & Controls: 68
  • Accountability: 96
  • Sustainability: 83
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 70.4%; rating input score 70
  • Program expense ratio: 68.3%; rating input score 68
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5.63 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 13th 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: 98.7%; rating input score 99; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 25th 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: 21.9%; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 9.66; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.8%; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.9% per year; rating input score 100; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.3% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.2% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 70.4% of revenue deployed · 68.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 17 of 18 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $2.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $316K · 19 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $494K reported
  • Consistency: 28 of 29 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 8 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 20/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.