Institute for Public Health Innovation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
463039129
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2014
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2027473512
Rating
85
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Personal Social Services

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$10,701,906
Expenses
$11,245,981
Assets
$12,933,767
Liabilities
$1,391,909

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MICHAEL RHEIN (PRESIDENT & CEO)
  • MICHAEL ROYSTER (SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • MICHAEL RHEIN (PRESIDENT & CEO): $267,359 total reported compensation
  • MICHAEL ROYSTER (SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT): $187,153 total reported compensation
  • CAROLYN ANN PADOVANO (SENIOR DIRECTOR): $181,574 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Iphi develops multi-sector partnerships and innovative solutions to improve the public's health and well-being across Maryland, Virginia and the district of columbia. Our work strengthens health systems and policy, enhances conditions that promote health, and builds community capacity to ensure equitable health opportunities for all.

What it reported doing in 2024

Community-based health promotion - iphi partners with healthcare providers, government agencies, and others to design, implement, and evaluate community-based approaches to community engagement, health promotion and disease prevention, and the overall improvement of accessible, quality, and equitable health and human services. As part of this initiative, iphi employs and supports community health workers who serve as liaisons between health and social services and the community to facilitate access to services and improve the quality and cultural responsiveness of service delivery. Iphi also assists public health departments and community organizations to scale up or augment their workforce in response to public health emergencies by providing recruitment, employment and management support services.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 77% for direct work, and 23% for grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 87
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 30
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 84.1%; rating input score 84
  • Program expense ratio: 79.2%; rating input score 79
  • Fundraising efficiency: $53.36 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -5.1%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.15; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.11; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.4%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 15.7% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 15.4% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 25.5% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 84.1% of revenue deployed · 79.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $8.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $267K · 16 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $481K reported
  • Consistency: 35 of 35 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 36 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 29 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 16/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 41/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 19/100.