Minnesota Hospital Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
410637595
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Saint Paul, MN, USA
Phone
6516411121
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues

Reported finances

Revenue
$11,981,689
Expenses
$10,820,891
Assets
$31,001,214
Liabilities
$6,949,767

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

Leadership & pay

29 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • RAHUL KORANNE MD (PRESIDENT & CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • RAHUL KORANNE MD (PRESIDENT & CEO): $1,236,028 total reported compensation
  • MARY KRINKIE (VP GOVERNMENT RELATIONS): $331,440 total reported compensation
  • BOB HUME (VP POLICY & COMMUNICATIONS): $325,701 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Advance the health of individuals and communities through leadership, advocacy and collaboration on behalf of Minnesota hospitals and health systems. Vision: minnesotans are healthy and have access to the right care at the right time in the right place.

What it reported doing in 2024

Quality and patient safety: mha partners with mha members to implement evidence-based practices to reduce patient harm across the board, including hospital acquired infections, medication and surgical events, and other adverse health events. Mha maintains a robust infrastructure of statewide committees on topics including surgery, health care associated infections, sepsis, falls, pressure injuries, medication safety, and patient and family engagement. Mha also convenes numerous learning networks and conferences for health systems to learn and to act together to improve patient care throughout Minnesota. Mha works to learn and spread best practices by partnering with other organizations and stakeholders in Minnesota and nationally, including the Minnesota departments of health and human services and quality improvement organizations.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 91% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 92
  • Sustainability: 60
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 79.8%; rating input score 80; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 94.7%; rating input score 95; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • 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: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 9.7%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.86; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.22; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 29.6%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 3.4% per year; rating input score 100; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.2% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 18 of 19 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1.2M · 29 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 12 of 13 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 45 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 40 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 55/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.