Minnesota Medical Association Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
416031551
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Minneapolis, MN, USA
Phone
6123781875
Rating
63
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$467,265
Expenses
$100,660
Assets
$2,202,514
Liabilities
$42,519

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JUAN BOWEN MD (PAST-PRESIDENT)
  • GEORGE SCHOEPHOERSTER MD (PRESIDENT)
  • KRISTEN GLOEGE (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)

Highest reported compensation

  • KRISTEN GLOEGE (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $111,801 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 foundation's mission is to be the mma's philanthropic partner in making Minnesota the healthiest state and best place to practice.

What it reported doing in 2024

As a philanthopic partner, the mma foundation supports the mission of the mma to make Minnesota the healthiest state and best place to practice. It develops and promotes initiatives to catalyze optimal health for all, foster well-being for physicians and physicians in training, and promote the profession and support diversification of the future workforce. In 2024, the foundation awarded one community health grant that provided $5,000 for wound care kits at a shelter that serves unhoused people in the duluth areas. The foundation also continued its support for medical students, residents, and fellows by providing scholarships for their community service and research. In 2024, the foundation delivered $6,545 in scholarship grants. In 2024, the foundation continued its suicide prevention initiative by funding physician-led training in counseling on access to lethal means and question-persuade-refer suicide prevention gatekeeper training to medical association members across Minnesota.in the past year, the foundation also supported its physician volunteerism program, which is a resource that identifies volunteer opportunities specifically for physicians. The program grows out of the foundation's desire to improve access to care in medically underserved urban and rural communities and calls upon the interest in community service held by most physicians.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 79% 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. 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: 28
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 81
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 28.3%; rating input score 28
  • Program expense ratio: 37.6%; rating input score 38
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • 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: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 78.5%; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 21.88; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 15.5%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -2.1% per year; rating input score 0; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.4% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.5% per year; rating input score 100; 31st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 28.3% of revenue deployed · 37.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $38K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $112K · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 22 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 28/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 38/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Audit committee oversight not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 24/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 40/100.