Medical Education Cooperation with Cuba
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 311603765
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Decatur, GA, USA
- Phone
- 6789048090
- Rating
- 80
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- International Academic Exchange
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $636,991
- Expenses
- $578,115
- Assets
- $765,659
- Liabilities
- $205,439
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
13 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- C WILLIAM KECK (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- JERRONTAY FOSTER (CFO): $63,000 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Medical education cooperation with cuba (medicc) promotes cooperation among the us, cuban and global health communities to improve health outcomes and equity, offering the cuban experience to inform global debate, policies, and practice.
What it reported doing in 2024
Md pipeline to community service: in 2024, medicc received a small grant totaling $20,000 from the louis and anne abrons foundation to support program and administrative costs. Medicc's md pipeline to community service program, a unique set of components designed to diversify the population of primary care physicians in the us is an important strategy in addressing health inequities and institutional racism in our country. A special group of us students and graduates, most of whom are african american or latino and from underserved communities, are awarded full scholarships by cuba's latin american school of medicine (elam), but then face significant financial and systemic hurdles in achieving their objective of practicing in under-resourced areas in the us. Nonetheless, over 250 elam graduates are now in residency or practice and are an important part of the answer to ongoing primary care workforce deficits.mnisi scholarship - the thabo mnisi scholarship defrays the significant financial burden of preparing for and taking the licensing exams required for becoming a physician in the us. The scholarship helps with test preparation materials, mentorship opportunities, exam fees, and other resources. The financial burden of these hurdles only continues to grow, with typical prep and exam fees now at approximately $5,000-$7,000 per student over several years, and more funding to support elam students' exam costs is needed.this year, medicc allotted $10,000 to the scholarship and provided 23 us elam students and graduates (for reference, there are 35 current students), with funding. This year, due to limited funding, we focused on funding only the next step in a student's journey. In total, we distributed equivalent to $9,274 worth of funds. Additional funds not yet spent are saved in case of student emergencies or extenuating circumstances. Additionally, we awarded 58 nbmes (nbmes are test preparation) which equates to $3,480 total. Medicc receives an in kind donation each year of about 75 nbmes directly from the nbme itself to provide to students. Because the nbmes are donated in-kind, their value is in addition to the $10,000 medicc allotted to the mnisi scholarship this year.community connections summer rotations - provides us elam students and graduates with clinical rotations in community health settings nationwide, a prerequisite for admission to post- graduate training and ultimately to clinical practice in the us. In 2023, medicc was able to arrange 5 rotations nationwide and secure partnerships with new sites. Currently, medicc does not arrange sites for students and instead accepts proposals from students and then vets sites. This year, medicc allotted $3,500 to community connections, and will only be able to provide funding to two students. So far, medicc has funded one student at $2,000. One other student applied, but will be completing her rotation virtually so is not eligible for funding.pathways to residency - our pathways to residency component supports us elam graduates through the residency application and matching process, and prepares the more advanced students as well. In previous years, medicc has worked with recent graduates to support conference attendance (aafp, fmec, and any other conferences identified by grads as important for them) and supported steady progress through all the requirements, some new in 2023, for foreign medical graduates to qualify for the match.this year, medicc allotted $500 to pathways to residency and will mainly provide assistance with conference registration fees for students. Students do not fill out an application for this funding, rather they submit funding requests directly to medicc which medicc fulfills on a first come, first served basis. So far this year, medicc has not had any applications for this funding.
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 98% 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
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 81
- Transparency & Controls: 94
- Accountability: 84
- Sustainability: 51
- Growth: 0
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 82%; rating input score 82
- Program expense ratio: 90.4%; rating input score 90
- Fundraising efficiency: $15.13 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
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: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th 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: 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: 9.2%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.32; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.27; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 10.9%; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -12.3% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -10.2% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -11.7% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 82% of revenue deployed · 90.4% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $522K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $63K · 13 people listed
- Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 13 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 51/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 52/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 26/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 34/100.