Mobilemed1 Inc Dba Medworks

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
263858369
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2011
Location
Cleveland, OH, USA
Phone
2166921685
Rating
65
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public Health Program (Includes General Health and Wellness Promotion Services)

Reported finances

Revenue
$422,603
Expenses
$510,517
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KATIE OUTCALT (CO-PRESIDENT)
  • ZAC PONSKY (CO-PRESIDENT)
  • CHARNELL ROBERTSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (FORMER))

Highest reported compensation

  • CHARNELL ROBERTSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (FORMER)): $72,588 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Medworks mission is to provide a collaborative portal for every patient who needs quality healthcare and access to permanent medical homes in northeast Ohio. Medworks provides care to those who find themselves in need regardless of their income level, citizenship, insurance status or geographic residence. Medworks provides an innovative vehicle through which healthcare provides, corporate sponsors and other volunteers can provide free health care, education, and other services.

What it reported doing in 2024

Medworks provides free health care via pop-up community clinics, mobilizing health care professionals and community volunteers to facilitate these clinics through donated time and services. In the short year of 2024, medworks hosted three sizable clinics including a dental clinic, women's health clinic, and a primary and specialty care clinic. In total, medworks served almost 200 patients.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 64
  • Transparency & Controls: 61
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 10
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 72%; rating input score 72
  • Program expense ratio: 59.6%; rating input score 60
  • Fundraising efficiency: $8.87 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 26th 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: 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: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -20.8%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 14.2%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.9% per year; rating input score 0; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.2% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.7% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 72% of revenue deployed · 59.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $304K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $73K · 13 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 25 of 26 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 36/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 14/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 25/100.