Maine Mental Health Partners

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
263426990
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2013
Forms available
Form 990 2013
Location
South Portland, ME, USA
Phone
2078427700
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Brain Disorders

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$5,351,401
Expenses
$5,354,945
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

25 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DENNIS P KING (PRES/CEO, EX)

Highest reported compensation

  • WILLIAM C CARON JR (PRES. MH, EX): $1,113,928 total reported compensation
  • DENNIS P KING (PRES/CEO, EX): $504,672 total reported compensation
  • GREGORY BOWERS (EXEC. VP, CO): $260,389 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To promote and maintain a high-quality, integrated system of mental health treatment providers and services in the mainehealth service region.

What it reported doing in 2013

Contract services to provide program management and technical assistance to other not-for-profits and government hospital systems. The division provides psychiatric program management and consulting services at Maine medical center, southern Maine medical center and various primary care delivery sites throughout the mainehealth network of healthcare providers. See attached community benefit report for Maine mental health partners & subsidaries for fiscal year ended 9/30/13. Next report will be prepared for 9/30/14 and will be included with the form 990 for the new organization, Maine behavioral healthcare.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some related-organization disclosures are missing and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 66
  • Accountability: 83
  • Sustainability: 16
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 98.6%; rating input score 99
  • Program expense ratio: 98.6%; rating input score 99
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Scored; rating input score 0

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 86.7%; rating input score 87; 19th 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: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -0.1%; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 32.2%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 5.9% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -30.8% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 98.6% of revenue deployed · 98.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 15 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $5.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1.1M · 25 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay and related organizations
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2010 to 2013
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 10 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 18 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: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 33/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 3/100.