Patient Experience Institute
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 464458914
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2018–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2020, Form 990-N 2015
- Location
- Nashville, TN, USA
- Phone
- 8447942797
- Rating
- 73
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Nonmonetary Support N.E.C.
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $314,847
- Expenses
- $260,145
- Assets
- $303,514
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
4 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JASON WOLF (PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- JASON WOLF (PRESIDENT): $36,000 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 general purpose of the patient experience institute (pxi) is to promote health by improving the patient experience. The term "patient experience" refers to the sum of all interactions, shaped by an organization's culture, that influence patient perceptions across the continuum of care. Pxi ensures its mission by providing a professional certification in patient experience, providing for the accreditation of continuing education focused on improving patient experience and supporting research opportunities to explore critical means to achieve patient experience improvement.
What it reported doing in 2024
Offers certified patient experience exam testing for 466 candidates resulting in 302 passing, achieving the status of cpxp. Also added certified administrator of volunteer services exam for 35 candidates resulting in 25 passing, achieving the status of cavs. Additional patient experience, continuing education credits were offered for both training programs and conferences. Since inception, almost 1600 individuals now hold the designation of cpxp.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 58% for direct work, and 42% for affiliated organizations.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 62
- Transparency & Controls: 90
- Accountability: 65
- Sustainability: 59
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 65%; rating input score 65
- Program expense ratio: 78.6%; rating input score 79
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 75%; rating input score 75; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- 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: 17.4%; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.17; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 13.8%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 12.4% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 9.1% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 20.6% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 65% of revenue deployed · 78.6% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 3 of 4 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $205K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $36K · 4 people listed
- Consistency: 15 of 15 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 6 filing years from 2018 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
- 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: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 45/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 25/100.