Maryland Emergency Medicine Network Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
450519724
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Baltimore, MD, USA
Phone
6672142051
Rating
42
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public Health Program (Includes General Health and Wellness Promotion Services)

Reported finances

Revenue
$5,634,251
Expenses
$1,871,698
Assets
$9,464,158
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

24 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MICHAEL WINTERS MD (CHAIRMAN AND PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • RACHEL HOOVER (MEMBER (THRU 11/4/24)): $773,205 total reported compensation
  • DEPRIST WHYE MD (MEMBER (THRU 11/4/24)): $596,231 total reported compensation
  • WILLIAM ELLIOTT (FORMER MEMBER (THRU 1/2024)): $418,917 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 further and promote, exclusively for charitable and scientific purposes, the development, coordination and implementation of a state-wide emergency medicine network to elevate the standard of care provided by emergency medicine physicians in rural, urban and historically underserved areas across the state of Maryland.

What it reported doing in 2024

Provision of services at the memorial hospital of easton, um shore medical center at cambridge, um shore medical center at chestertown and queen anne's emergency center. Staff the emergency departments at all 3 hospitals/centers, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, with high quality emergency medicine physicians, physician assistants, and nurse practitioners. This activity was discontinued as of june 1, 2024.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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

MIXED - 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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 5
  • Transparency & Controls: 77
  • Accountability: 65
  • Sustainability: 81
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 3.2%; rating input score 3
  • Program expense ratio: 9.5%; rating input score 9
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 11th 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: NotApplicable
    • 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: 66.8%; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.06; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 184.9%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -5.8% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -5.2% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1.9% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 3.2% of revenue deployed · 9.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 3 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $178K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $773K · 24 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $3.7M reported
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 14 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 7 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 3/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 9/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.