Meriter Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237098688
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Madison, WI, USA
Phone
6084175800
Rating
52
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public Foundations

Reported finances

Revenue
$6,564,063
Expenses
$2,138,701
Assets
$29,497,791
Liabilities
$2,433,442

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

Leadership & pay

26 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JAMES ARNETT (BOARD MEMBER & MARKET PRESIDENT/CEO)
  • REBECCA MADSON (PRESIDENT, FOUNDATION)
  • SUE ERICKSON TO 622 (FORMER CEO UPH MERITER)

Highest reported compensation

  • JAMES ARNETT (BOARD MEMBER & MARKET PRESIDENT/CEO): $707,912 total reported compensation
  • PAM WETZEL MD (BOARD MEMBER & MARKET CMO): $665,360 total reported compensation
  • BETH ERDMAN (MARKET CFO): $559,430 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Meriter foundation exists to raise and manage gifts in support of the programs and services that advance the mission of meriter hospital, inc.

What it reported doing in 2024

Meriter foundation, inc. Is a not-for-profit 501 (c)(3) charitable organization that raises, invests, grants and stewards gifts on behalf of meriter hospital, inc. Thousands of individuals and organizations have offered charitable giving support that has helped advance meriter's commitment to the healthcare needs of our community. Such gifts have a positive and powerful impact that spans generations and extends beyond the doors of meriter hospital, inc. Into the heart of dane county and beyond. Philanthropy provides a margin of excellence that allows meriter to accomplish projects and implement programs that might not otherwise be possible. In addition to raising money for programs and capital projects, the foundation grants funds from existing assets to select research and health education initiatives.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 77% of its reported program spending out as grants.

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: 11
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 87
  • Sustainability: 80
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 5.3%; rating input score 5
  • Program expense ratio: 20.1%; rating input score 20
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.83 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 77.3%; rating input score 77; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 67.4%; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 13.79; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.08; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 40.3%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.7% per year; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.2% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.8% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 5.3% of revenue deployed · 20.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 17 of 22 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $430K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $708K · 26 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 80 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 5/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 20/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 12/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 2/100.