Alameda-contra Costa Medical Association
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 941007633
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2011–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Lafayette, CA, USA
- Phone
- 5106545383
- Rating
- 67
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $2,588,337
- Expenses
- $1,882,283
- Assets
- $15,089,311
- Liabilities
- $871,849
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
31 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- CLIFFORD WONG (PRESIDENT-ELECT)
- ALBERT BROOKS (IMMEDIATE PAST-PRESIDENT)
- IRENE LO (PRESIDENT)
- JOSEPH GREAVES MD (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- JOSEPH GREAVES MD (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $363,531 total reported compensation
- ALBERT BROOKS (IMMEDIATE PAST-PRESIDENT): $5,000 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 bring in to one organization the doctors of medicine of alameda and contra costa counties, so that by frequent meetings and full and frank interchange of views, they may secure such intelligent unity and harmony in every phase of their labor as will elevate and make effective the opinions of the profession in all scientific, medical, public health, medical economic and social affairs in which the medical profession has valid interest or public responsibility. In addition, the association shall encorage research; protect its members against impositions; settle disputes and adjust ethical relations of its members; unite with similar societies in other counties of the state to form the California medical association; and as an organized body, serve the public interest.
What it reported doing in 2024
Professional advancement of the medical profession to provide high quality health care services to patients and serve the public interest.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 74% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 95% 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 - 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 44
- Transparency & Controls: 75
- Accountability: 88
- Sustainability: 81
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 38.2%; rating input score 38
- Program expense ratio: 67.9%; rating input score 68
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 7th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 93.4%; rating input score 93; 28th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 96.7%; rating input score 97; 26th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Fail
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 27.3%; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 8.02; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 2.9%; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 4.8% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 2.1% per year; rating input score 100; 21st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 8.1% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 38.2% of revenue deployed · 67.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 29 of 30 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.3M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $364K · 31 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 31 of 32 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 38/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.