Wheaton Franciscan - St Joseph Foundation Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 391636804
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2018
- Forms available
- Form 990 2018
- Location
- Milwaukee, WI, USA
- Phone
- 3147338000
- Rating
- 73
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Single Organization Support
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $353,624
- Expenses
- $294,724
- Assets
- $5,016,616
- Liabilities
- $122,964
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
14 people listed
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Rooted in the loving ministry of jesus as healer, we commit ourselves to serving all persons with special attention to those who are poor and vulnerable. Our catholic health ministry is dedicated to spiritually-centered, holistic care which sustains and improves the health of individuals and communities. We are advocates for a compassionate and just society through our actions and our words.
What it reported doing in 2018
The Wheaton Franciscan - St. Joseph Hospital Campus is a 501(c)(3) charitable organization that aims to connect donors with initiatives benefiting the health and well-being of our community, in an effort to enhance the exceptional and compassionate health care services provided by our physicians, nurses, and staff at St. Joseph Campus and our outpatient centers: Wheaton Franciscan - Wauwatosa and Brown Deer Campuses. Our mission is to support the St. Joseph Hospital Campus by promoting and strengthening the image, role and identity of St. Joseph to others, generating resources for St. Joseph through focused cultivation, and fundraising and being responsible stewards of the Foundation assets.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 80% 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 82
- Transparency & Controls: 73
- Accountability: 70
- Sustainability: 69
- Growth: 20
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 86.6%; rating input score 87
- Program expense ratio: 99.9%; rating input score 100
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 22nd 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%; rating input score 98; 54th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 16th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 75
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Limited
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 16.7%; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 17.02; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 70%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -18.3% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -4.9% per year; rating input score 0; 16th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 5.5% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 86.6% of revenue deployed · 99.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 6 of 9 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $294K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $850K · 14 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 19 of 20 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
- Filing history: 9 filing years from 2010 to 2018
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 426 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.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 46/100.