Moasc Purchasing Network Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
261307825
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2016
Location
Mckinney, TX, USA
Phone
2145789589
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues

Reported finances

Revenue
$155
Expenses
$226,767
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • VARUN GUPTA (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • IRA FELMAN (BOARD MEMBER): $11,500 total reported compensation
  • KEITH PIPES (BOARD MEMBER): $4,500 total reported compensation
  • JONATHAN DOCTOR (TREASURER): $4,500 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To negotiate prices and arrange for the purchase of oncology drugs, supplies, and equipment directly from manufacturers, distributors, retailers, and wholesales for moasc members and patient advocacy.

What it reported doing in 2016

Provided price book and price match programs for oncology products for purchase of drugs, supplies and equipment for the benefit of the moasc member practices. Provided eductional support to moasc members for eduction, patient and provider advocacy. Provided electronic distribution list and discussion group so members can ask questions and get answers from fellow members. Provided online repository which included downloadable forms, templates and fact sheets. Provided website and monthly newsletter to moasc members.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 65% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 93
  • Accountability: 50
  • Sustainability: 3
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 50%; rating input score 50; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -146,201.3%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.4%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 120% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -44.3% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -22.2% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 6 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $12K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 16 of 16 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2010 to 2016
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 50/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 18/100.