Delaware Foundation for Medical Services

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
510346160
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Middletown, DE, USA
Phone
3023661400
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community Health Systems

Reported finances

Revenue
$186,464
Expenses
$133,515
Assets
$2,006,658
Liabilities
$4,340

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MARK B THOMPSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • MARK B THOMPSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $181,641 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To receive and administer gifts of property for charitable, benevolent civic, health, scientific and educational purposes, primarily for the purpose of enhancing the quality of medical care in the state of Delaware in a manner that shall: 1. Afford to persons an opportunity to make gifts with a greater beneficial result than possible through individual action; 2. Afford to corporations an opportunity equal to that of individuals to create memorials or make gifts as the circumstances of their economic situations warrant, from time to time; and, 3. Safeguard and provide for the permanent security of such gifts.

What it reported doing in 2025

The foundation provides awards to promote programs for better access and quality of healthcare in the state of Delaware.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 60% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as 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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 66
  • Transparency & Controls: 62
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 74
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 88.8%; rating input score 89
  • Program expense ratio: 51%; rating input score 51
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 15th 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: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 28.4%; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 15.03; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.7%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -9.1% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -8.1% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -6.4% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 88.8% of revenue deployed · 51% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $68K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $182K · 11 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 17 of 18 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2012 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 4 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 — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 51/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 29/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 48/100.