Maryland Independent School Consortium

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
463607796
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2013
Location
Crownsville, MD, USA
Phone
4109231171
Rating
45
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Insurance Providers

Reported finances

Revenue
$23,719
Expenses
$111,833
Assets
$1,433,321
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

People named in this filing

  • Deborah Charbonneau (Chairman)
  • Ani Cook (Vice Chairman)
  • Meg McClure (Treasurer)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

The Maryland Independent School Consortium exists to provide or to obtain access to welfare benefits, through insurance or otherwise, for eligible employees and employee dependents of private schools and their affiliates in Maryland.

What it reported doing in 2024

The Maryland Independent School Consortium has contracted with a major health insurance carrier to provide health insurance contracts complying with agreed upon plan designs and premiums to the eligible employees of each school and their affiliates. Premiums are paid directly to the health insurance carrier by each school. Under the terms of the contract, should the relationship between premiums paid and claims incurred exceed agreed upon ratio, the health insurance carrier will reimburse a portion of the excess premium to the Consortium, to hold for the benefit of the employees of the schools. Those funds are to be used to fund the operating expenses of the Consortium, to provide wellness initiatives for the employees of member schools, and to fund a portion of future premiums if and when the Trustees of the Consortium vote to do so.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

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: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 40
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -371.5%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 12.82; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -100% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 18.9% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0% per year; rating input score 0; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 14 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 10 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 14 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 9/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.