Dekalb Medical Center Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
581924605
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2016
Location
Decatur, GA, USA
Phone
4045015626
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
University or Technological Institute

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,558,974
Expenses
$1,700,926
Assets
$6,840,639
Liabilities
$483,258

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

25 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • John A Shelton Jr (DMC PRESIDENT/CEO (through 11/16))
  • Leigh Minter (Executive Director (Through 3/16))

Highest reported compensation

  • John A Shelton Jr (DMC PRESIDENT/CEO (through 11/16)): $760,011 total reported compensation
  • Raoul Mayer PhD MD (DIRECTOR): $644,496 total reported compensation
  • Dane Henry (COO): $420,680 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of the DeKalb Medical Foundation ("Foundation") is to provide an ever-strengthening link between the people of DeKalb Medical Center and the people of the community which DeKalb Medical Center serves. please see schedule O for a continuation.To accomplish our mission, the Foundation has four purposes: 1. To provide a means for increased mutual understanding and communication between the community and DeKalb Medical Center through education and involvement, 2. To progressively plan, implement and support health-related service programs that would benefit the community.3. To provide the means to generate needed philanthropy to maintain, enhance and expand the healthcare services provided by DeKalb Medical Center.4. To support the scientific and clinical research activities of DeKalb Medical Center.

What it reported doing in 2016

A scholarship at the right time in life can be the key to a person's successful achievement of dreams. The dekalb medical foundation offers three scholarship funds that are designed to help people in our community succeed. Please see schedule o for a scholarship detail.audrey & jack morgan scholarship audrey and jack morgan have been lifelong supporters of the tremendous needs present in the healthcare community and have established a scholarship to enable individuals employed at dekalb medical to pursue additional educational opportunities. These scholarships are awarded in the spring of each year to individuals who have a passion to make a greater contribution in the lives of people who are in need of compassionate care. The amount of each scholarship will vary depending on the type of education that applicant is seeking. Each study program selected must be offered at an accredited institution or it should provide a type of accreditation recognized in the hiring practices at dekalb medical.dr. Gulshan harjee scholarshipgulshan s. Harjee, m.d., a well-known internist in the atlanta area, knows what it means to work hard to make your dreams come true. All of her life she wanted to be a physician. She grew up in a country that did not have accessible health care. She has established the dr. Gulshan harjee scholarship program to give scholarships to young men and women finishing high school who want the chance to pursue a career in an allied healthcare field. Dr. Mark coppage nursing scholarship mark coppage, m.d. Died on march 3, 1989 in an automobile accident in Florida. The dekalb medical community in which he practiced and gave so much of his energy and spirit still feels his absence. He gave without boundary of his time, talent, resources and love. Each person who touched his life felt enriched and inspired. An anonymous donor established the dr. Mark coppage nursing scholarship fund to sustain his memory and the remarkable principles for which he stood. Since this scholarship was established in 1993, 145 scholarships have been given, totaling over $360,000. This scholarship program is open to individuals who represent some of those outstanding human qualities for which dr. Coppage was so well known.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 60% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 44% for direct work, and 56% for grants.

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 program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 77
  • Transparency & Controls: 64
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 41
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 91.5%; rating input score 91
  • Program expense ratio: 80.1%; rating input score 80
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 6th 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: 79.3%; rating input score 79; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 78.6%; rating input score 79; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -9.1%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.02; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.07; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 11.4%; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -41.8% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -6.6% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 91.5% of revenue deployed · 80.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 22 of 28 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $760K · 25 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 20 of 21 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2009 to 2016
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 6 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 — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 16/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 30/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 56/100.