Bluff City Medical Society

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
581618327
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2010–2021
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2021
Location
Memphis, TN, USA
Phone
9013000958
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$124,419
Expenses
$84,316
Assets
$210,610
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2021. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JESSICA RUFFIN MD (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • KITSON MICHELLE MD (PRESIDENT-ELECT)
  • LATONYA WASHINGTON MD (PRESIDENT)
  • PERISCO WOFFORD MD (IMMEIDATE PAST PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • BIANCA SWEETEN MD (TREASURER)
  • JANICE COOPER (EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT)
  • JARA BEST-JONES MD (PARLIMENTARIAN)

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 2021. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The organization promotes education by giving scholarships to pre-med students.

What it reported doing in 2021

Bluff city medical society also sponsors an annual lecture to help medical personnel, including students, keep abreast of recent advances, and a business symposium to keep physicians up-to-date with new trends in the business of medicine and to provice necessary information to assist with compliance with new regulations in healthcare.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 73% 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

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 58
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 73
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 48.5%; rating input score 49
  • Program expense ratio: 71.6%; rating input score 72

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 32.2%; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.5; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 16.6%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -8.2% per year; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.6% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.1% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 48.5% of revenue deployed · 71.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $60K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2010 to 2021
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 49/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 21/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.