Maryland Public Health Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
520799596
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2022–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2021
Location
Columbia, MD, USA
Phone
4434750242
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public Health Program (Includes General Health and Wellness Promotion Services)

Reported finances

Revenue
$72,920
Expenses
$18,199
Assets
$120,986
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

People named in this filing

  • HANNA IDRIESS (DIRECTOR)
  • CESIA PORTILLO (DIRECTOR)
  • NELLIE WASHINGTON (DIRECTOR)

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

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

MDPHA is a nonprofit professional organization that promotes and protects the health of Maryland communities through education, policy advocacy, and collaborative public health initiatives.

What it reported doing in 2025

Events: Gardening & Beats-NPHW activity 04/2025 $275 ATM withdrawal $5 Main Events: Summer Social Event 08/31 $4504.74 Annual Meeting 12/11 $11,167.34 Climate Environment 12/5 $2,247.10 Total: $18,199

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 82% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The program-spending lines do not add up, so the filing cannot show reliably whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filed totals do not add up.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 53
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 85
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 25%; rating input score 25
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 75%; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 6.65; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.2% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.5% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 22.8% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 25% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $18K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 5 of 7 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2022 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 25/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Series expense component sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Series revenue less expenses did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.