Friends Mutual Health Group

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
205892892
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Lancaster, PA, USA
Phone
7172937840
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Insurance Providers

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,793,872
Expenses
$4,068,331
Assets
$7,088,320
Liabilities
$552,795

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • PHIL BURKHOLDER (BOARD MEMBER): $337,142 total reported compensation
  • MARY JANE SCHEFFLER (BOARD MEMBER): $144,569 total reported compensation
  • LEE MEINICKE (TREASURER): $102,588 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Friends mutual health group (fmhg) was founded on the principle of mutual aid provided to quaker organizations. Friends mutual health group is guided by the practices and beliefs of the society of friends, foremost being the recognition that there is that of god in all people, and exists to provide access to high quality health care at a reasonable cost to the employees and their dependents of its member organizations while maintaining sound business practices. By doing so, friends mutual health group seeks to be the health plan of choice for any quaker organization, yearly meeting, monthly meeting or friends church regardless of its size.

What it reported doing in 2025

Stop loss premiums related to claims, administrative claim costs

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 93% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Member-benefit provider. The nonprofit used 80% of its reported program spending for member benefits.

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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 36
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 97.4%; rating input score 97
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Limited
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -7.2%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.74; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.08; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.8%; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -4.6% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -6.5% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.2% per year; rating input score 100; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 97.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 3 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $337K · 7 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $105K reported
  • Consistency: 19 of 19 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2012 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 17 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 19 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.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 12/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 53/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 53/100.