Pcci
Legal name: Parkland Center for Clinical Innovation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 455363543
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2012–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
- Location
- Dallas, Texas, USA
- Phone
- 214.385.4876
- Rating
- 57
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Health Support Services
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $20,932,051
- Expenses
- $12,559,456
- Assets
- $6,629,378
- Liabilities
- $34,071,230
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
18 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- STEVE MIFF (CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- Dr Frederick P Cerise (Board Member): $1,228,500 total reported compensation
- STEVE MIFF (CEO): $647,733 total reported compensation
- Aida SOMUN (COO): $391,274 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
PCCI leverages clinical expertise, data science and Non-Medical Drivers of Health to address the needs of vulnerable populations.
What it reported doing in 2024
(a)test theories and ultimately develop methodologies and resources to support innovative health care services; (b) provide services for the Dallas County Hospital District d/b/a Parkland Health ("Parkland") in its role as a unit of local government and a teaching hospital for the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center; (c) solicit, receive and administer grants and philanthropic gifts related to PCCI's research and innovation; (d) share its expertise and research results via appropriate scientific publications, consultative relationships and licensure of intellectual property; and (e) collaborate with other non-profit, academic, and health care industry partners to fulfill these Purposes consistent with its Certificate of Formation, as it may be amended from time-to-time (the "Certificate").
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
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 37
- Transparency & Controls: 85
- Accountability: 50
- Sustainability: 49
- Growth: 80
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 33.6%; rating input score 34
- Program expense ratio: 52.8%; rating input score 53
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Pass
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Pass
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Missing
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 14.3%; rating input score 14; 6th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
- 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: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 40%; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.53; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 5.14; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 29.1%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 4.8% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 5.5% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -5.3% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 5 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 3 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 33.6% of revenue deployed · 52.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 1 of 7 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $6.6M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $1.2M · 18 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $101K reported
- Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, executive pay, and related organizations
- Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 16 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 4 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 34/100.
- High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 14/100.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 53/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 17/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 2/100.