Alliance for Integrated Medication Management

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
273176816
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Fairfax, VA, USA
Phone
7037392330
Rating
59
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Health Support Services

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$365,328
Expenses
$384,984
Assets
$541,513
Liabilities
$512,882

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • TODD D SORENSEN PHARMD FAPHA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • TODD D SORENSEN PHARMD FAPHA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $30,250 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Aimm uses ihi breakthrough model of improvement to achieve higher level of performance characterized by: patient-centered coordinated care for defined, high-risk populations, application of best practices identified from high-performing organizations across the us, use of rapid, interactive performance improvement cycles designed to achieve results quickly, interprofessional care provided through specially designed delivery systems, and registries to manage high-risk patients and track their care.

What it reported doing in 2025

Aimm is the fiscal sponsor of advancing kidney health through optimal medication management (akhomm), helping to advance its goals to improve outcomes and reduce healthcare costs for those with kidney disease. Akhomm and aimm's values align, as we are both organizations championing team-based medication management and the importance of pharmacists on cmm teams. Aimm assists in akhomm's work sponsored by companies such as vifor, astrazeneca, and glaxosmithkline.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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

MIXED - 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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 34
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 30
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 39%; rating input score 39
  • Program expense ratio: 37%; rating input score 37
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -5.4%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.41; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.95; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.9%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -7.3% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -5.8% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0.8% per year; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 39% of revenue deployed · 37% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $142K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $30K · 6 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $140K reported
  • Consistency: 19 of 19 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2018 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 39/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 37/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 25/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 50/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 4/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 28/100.