Michigan Center for Clinical Systems Improvement
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 274330555
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2015–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Grand Rapids, MI, USA
- Phone
- 6165510795
- Rating
- 66
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Research Institutes and/or Public Policy Analysis
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,233,838
- Expenses
- $919,522
- Assets
- $3,995,393
- Liabilities
- $86,694
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
10 people listed
Highest reported compensation
- THOMAS DAHLBORG (EXECUTIVE DI): $170,925 total reported compensation
- SUSAN VOS (PROJECT DIRE): $157,779 total reported compensation
- PHIL BATY MD (MEDICAL DIRE): $37,440 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The organization's mission is to support community-based, stakeholder driven training for care teams including physicians, care managers, care coordinators, medical assistants and behavioral health specialists; facilitate training and implementation of chronic pain, substance use disorder, serious illness/palliative care, extreme risk protection order (erpo), and medical behavioral initiatives; and engage health enterprise stakeholders to advance solutions for complex patients.
What it reported doing in 2024
Conducted training programs in the area of patient engagement and self- management, motivational interviewing skills, and team-based for health systems (nurses, care managers, care coordinators, social workers, and others) to improve clinical, operational and patient experience results. Trainings assisted teams in caring for patients with medicare, medicaid, and employer-based insurance as well as the uninsured. Programs were offered throughout the state of Michigan to member and non-member organizations alike. Partnered to develop extreme risk protection order (erpo) educational training and resources.
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 100% 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
SUPPORTED - 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: 40
- Transparency & Controls: 79
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 70
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 33.1%; rating input score 33
- Program expense ratio: 43.1%; rating input score 43
- Fundraising efficiency: $24.59 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- 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: Limited
- 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: 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: 25.5%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.35; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 39.8%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -2.7% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 10% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 22.4% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 33.1% of revenue deployed · 43.1% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $396K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $171K · 10 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 8 filing years from 2015 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
- 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 33/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 43/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 4/100.