Mainsail Health Partners

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
844667819
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Charleston, SC, USA
Phone
8438768745
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Reported finances

Revenue
$15,069,975
Expenses
$8,351,998
Assets
$207,050,943
Liabilities
$67,385,795

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • PATRICK CAWLEY (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • PATRICK CAWLEY (CEO): $1,175,187 total reported compensation
  • CHARLES SCHULZE (DIRECTOR): $500 total reported compensation
  • DONALD R JOHNSON II (CHAIR & DIRECTOR): $500 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To promote and support, independently but within alignment with and in relation to, medical university of South Carolina (musc) and its charitable, eleemosynary, educational, scientific mission, purpose, and programs.

What it reported doing in 2024

To explore, investigate, contract for, and engage in collaborative initiatives with other persons to undertake scientific, clinical, educational, and research activities and endeavors consistent with the objectives and mission of musc; to promote, encourage and aid interactions and collaborative relationships with private industry that are aligned with the mission and objectives of musc, to the extent permitted by applicable law; to seek and establish strategic ventures with independent entities that benefit the musc enterprise and the community it serves; to promote the recruitment and retention of a superior faculty by encouraging and aiding their personal development through the support of medical and clinical sponsored research programs, agreements, and initiatives at or involving musc; to promote and support the charitable, eleemosynary, educational, medical, scientific and research purposes of musc by and through support of medical university hospital authority (muha), university medical associates of the medical university of South Carolina (uma), and any other organization recognized, from time to time, by musc as an affiliate; to promote, support and aid any and all other activities and programs, which will further the mission and programs of musc.

Operating model

Revenue model
Affiliate-supported. 65% of the money available for current operations came from contributions from related organizations.
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 - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 57
  • Transparency & Controls: 69
  • Accountability: 86
  • Sustainability: 88
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 50.6%; rating input score 51
  • Program expense ratio: 87.1%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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: 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: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 44.6%; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 24.79; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.33; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0.4%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 82.4% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 44% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 50.5% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 50.6% of revenue deployed · 87.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $7.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1.2M · 8 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 19 of 19 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 3 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 51/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 9 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 44/100.