Mjhs Medical Associates Pc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
275273404
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
7184917208
Rating
59
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Health Treatment Facilities, Primarily Outpatient
Affiliation
Judaism

Reported finances

Revenue
$11,483,280
Expenses
$11,982,137
Assets
$1,093,444
Liabilities
$2,129,015

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Kerrianne Page MD (PRESIDENT / SHAREHOLDER)

Highest reported compensation

  • Kerrianne Page MD (PRESIDENT / SHAREHOLDER): $584,583 total reported compensation
  • Gilbert Burgos MD (Director): $560,436 total reported compensation
  • Russell Portenoy (FORMER OFFICER): $464,544 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 purpose for which the corporation is formed is to practice the profession of medicine for affiliates of metropolitan jewish health system, inc., which provide medical and health services.

What it reported doing in 2024

Mjhs medical associates, pc coordinates physician services and practices medicine with a focus on palliative care and medical management. The pc has agreements with mjhs hospice and palliative care and elderplan, inc., both organizations within the mjhs family. In 2024, the medical pc provided approximately 1,995 palliative care visits. It also provided 2,339 member months of medical management services to elderplan members - through the mjhs plus program - and 15,780 member months of services to nursing home residents - through the elderplan isnp.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 77% of the money available for current operations came from other operating 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

MIXED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 79
  • Transparency & Controls: 55
  • Accountability: 32
  • Sustainability: 10
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 90.1%; rating input score 90
  • Program expense ratio: 86.3%; rating input score 86
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 8th 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: No; rating input score 0

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 3rd 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: Fail
    • 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: -4.3%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.09; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.95; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 13.6%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 11% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 11.5% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1.3% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 90.1% of revenue deployed · 86.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 5 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $10.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $585K · 11 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $592K reported
  • Consistency: 24 of 25 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 14 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 18/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 10/100.