Meadows Mental Health Policy Institute
Legal name: Meadows Mental Health Policy Institute for Texas
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 463992618
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2015–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
- Location
- Dallas, TX, US
- Phone
- (972) 884-4660
- Rating
- 83
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Standard
- Sector
- Research Institutes and/or Public Policy Analysis
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $40,112,213
- Expenses
- $36,533,287
- Assets
- $37,825,211
- Liabilities
- $9,634,768
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
45 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- ANDREW KELLER (President & CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- ANDREW KELLER (President & CEO): $819,878 total reported compensation
- QUIANTA MOORE (EXEC VP/EXEC DIR HACKETT CTR): $583,947 total reported compensation
- MELISSA INGALLS-ROWAN (CHIEF OPERATIONS OFFICER): $543,527 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Help us make Texas the national leader in treating all people with mental health needs.
What it reported doing in 2024
Health Systems Transformation: The Meadows Mental Health Policy Institute is transforming the U.S. health care system so people can easily find mental health care where it is most convenient: in primary care offices. To do this, the Meadows Institute integrates high-quality mental health care into family practices, pediatricians offices, and other primary care settings. In 2024, the Meadows Institute continued to advance integrated behavioral health care, including the gold standard known as the Collaborative Care Model (CoCM), across communities nationwide. To free every Texan from untreated depression and suicide, the Meadows Institute further increased the impact of its Lone Star Depression Challenge (LSDC). As a result of this initiative, which has been adopted by 23 health systems across Texas collectively serving 7.1 million people, more than 550,000 individuals received treatment for depression and more than 120,000 people got better. The Meadows Institute also partnered with Northwestern Medicine and West Health to accelerate the adoption of collaborative care across more than 70 clinics serving more than 350,000 people. The Meadows Institute also laid ground in New York, Michigan, Colorado, and Florida to help millions more people access high-quality mental health care at their regular doctors office. At the same time, the Meadows Institute advanced programs in communities across the state to make high-quality specialty care more accessible for people with complex mental health needs, including increased access to coordinated specialty care, improving services for individuals experiencing homelessness, advancing trauma-informed hospital redesign, and conducting regional assessments of communities strengths, gaps and opportunities to provide actionable recommendations that guide local stakeholders in expanding access to care.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 67% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 92% 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.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 74
- Transparency & Controls: 93
- Accountability: 91
- Sustainability: 48
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 75.1%; rating input score 75
- Program expense ratio: 78.5%; rating input score 79
- Fundraising efficiency: $15.92 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Pass
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Pass
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 99.6%; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
- 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: 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: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 8.9%; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.04; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.25; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 18%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 15.8% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 14.5% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 6.3% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 12 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 8 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 75.1% of revenue deployed · 78.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 25 of 25 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 7 filed program accomplishments · $28.7M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $820K · 45 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $2.3M reported
- Consistency: 38 of 39 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 10 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 9 filing years from 2015 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 39 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 22 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: Fundraising efficiency scored 51/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 37/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 51/100.