Medical Alumni Association of the University of Maryland Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 520615433
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Baltimore, MD, USA
- Phone
- 4107067454
- Rating
- 71
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Alumni Associations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,969,170
- Expenses
- $1,687,195
- Assets
- $5,136,135
- Liabilities
- $37,331
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
18 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- GEORGE C KOCHMAN III MD (PRESIDENT (UNTIL 05/25))
- TUANH TONNU MD (PRESIDENT-ELECT (UNTIL 05/25), PRESIDENT)
- SACHIN KALYANI MD (VP (UNTIL 05/25),PRESIDENT-ELECT)
- LAWRENCE R PITROF (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- LAWRENCE R PITROF (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $357,173 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 provide an alumni association for graduates of the university of Maryland medical school to enhance efforts in carrying on the educational mission of the school, and preserve a historic teaching facility for use by alumni and students now and in the future.
What it reported doing in 2024
Joint sponsorship of "the bulletin" magazine: four issues of "the bulletin" were published and mailed to more than 9,000 alumni, faculty, friends, and students of the medical school and emailed to thousands more. An editorial board, consisting of more than 20 alumni and medical school representatives, provided guidance and editorial assistance in the magazine's production. The bulletin is recognized as the oldest medical alumni publication in the united states.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 76% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 69% for direct work, and 31% for grants.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 59
- Transparency & Controls: 80
- Accountability: 90
- Sustainability: 64
- Growth: 40
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 61.6%; rating input score 62
- Program expense ratio: 67.3%; rating input score 67
- Fundraising efficiency: $5.98 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 19th 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: Pass
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 96.8%; rating input score 97; 44th 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 14.3%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.04; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 21.2%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -4.2% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 0.1% per year; rating input score 100; 15th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -2.8% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 61.6% of revenue deployed · 67.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $1.1M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $357K · 18 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 2 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: Fundraising efficiency scored 22/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 13/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.