Mount Clemens Regional Health Care Foundation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 382578873
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Mount Clemens, MI, USA
- Phone
- 5867414282
- Rating
- 68
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Standard
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,445,983
- Expenses
- $796,764
- Assets
- $11,642,222
- Liabilities
- $107,697
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
23 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- TRACEY FRANOVICH (CEO OF MCLAREN MACOMB)
- LOUISE RALLIS (VICE PRESIDENT, FOUNDATION)
Highest reported compensation
- DEREK MORKEL (CORPORATE VP CIO, INTERIM CFO - BEG 4/25): $1,132,469 total reported compensation
- TRACEY FRANOVICH (CEO OF MCLAREN MACOMB): $921,540 total reported compensation
- STEVE SNYDER (CFO - PART YEAR): $331,305 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 primary purpose of the mcrh foundation (the foundation) is to raise funds from the private sector to better enable mclaren macomb to realize its goal of providing a comprehensive health care delivery system to the citizens of macomb county.
What it reported doing in 2024
To support the healthcare mission of mclaren macomb by cultivating and building relationships with donors, physicians, grateful patients and friends. To enhance the hospital's ability to provide state-of-the-art facilities and advanced clinical care through our philanthropic efforts to increase charitable donations. To provide support as the mclaren macomb healthcare foundation in its role as a leader charged with furthering its mission and overseeing fund-raising activities for the hospital.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 70% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as 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 few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 58
- Transparency & Controls: 72
- Accountability: 83
- Sustainability: 79
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 52.1%; rating input score 52
- Program expense ratio: 65.9%; rating input score 66
- Fundraising efficiency: $29.75 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 22nd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 95%; rating input score 95; 25th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
- 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: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 44.9%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 14.61; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 28.9%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -1% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 2.5% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 2.2% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 52.1% of revenue deployed · 65.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 19 of 20 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $525K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $1.1M · 23 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 22 of 23 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- Related organizations: 55 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.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 52/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 9 not reported.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.