Mississippi Foundation for Medical Care Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 237271055
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2016–2020
- Forms available
- Form 990 2020, Form 990-T 2020
- Location
- Ridgeland, MS, USA
- Phone
- 6019571575
- Rating
- 73
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Reproductive Health Care Facilities and Allied Services
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,344,645
- Expenses
- $1,614,484
- Assets
- $1,948,413
- Liabilities
- $704,162
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
8 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- STANLEY HARTNESS MD (BOD PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- THOMAS GARNER (CFO): $182,681 total reported compensation
- STANLEY HARTNESS MD (BOD PRESIDENT): $200 total reported compensation
- HELEN TURNER MD (DIRECTOR): $200 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To serve as the state of Mississippi's primary quality improvement organization (qio) for the medicare program, as well as for certain other health programs and providers, both public and private.
What it reported doing in 2020
To serve as the designated medicare quality improvement organization (qio) for the state of mississsippi for the purpose of maintaining the quality of care available under medicare, and to also provide similar services for other public and private health care programs and organizations.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 98% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and program spending has declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 80
- Transparency & Controls: 72
- Accountability: 91
- Sustainability: 27
- Growth: 0
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 95.8%; rating input score 96
- Program expense ratio: 81.1%; rating input score 81
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 17th 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: Pass
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
- 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: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -20.1%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.21; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.36; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 1.3%; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -15% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -24.4% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -10.3% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 95.8% of revenue deployed · 81.1% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.3M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $183K · 8 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 16 of 17 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
- Filing history: 5 filing years from 2016 to 2020
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 2 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.
Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 8/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 44/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 25/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.