Promedica Foundation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 341517672
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Toledo, OH, USA
- Phone
- 5675853618
- Rating
- 57
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Standard
- Sector
- Single Organization Support
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $32,387,903
- Expenses
- $19,302,765
- Assets
- $392,846,170
- Liabilities
- $4,225,342
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
8 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- CHRISTI ANSBERG (PRESIDENT/CHIEF PHILANTHROPY OFFICER)
- GARY CATES (PRESIDENT - PART YEAR)
- ARTURO POLIZZI (TRUSTEE/CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- ARTURO POLIZZI (TRUSTEE/CEO): $3,133,332 total reported compensation
- TERRENCE METZGER (TREASURER/CFO): $1,215,928 total reported compensation
- ANGELA BRANDT (TRUSTEE/CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER): $1,202,326 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 promedica foundation's mission is to generate and direct the utilization of resources to enrich existing programs and fund new services, inspiring excellence in the provision of health care and enhancing quality of life for the people of our community.
What it reported doing in 2024
Promote health and well-being with support for medical care, medical education, medical research, and social determinants of health, and by soliciting contributions, providing grants, and investing funds to generate income to support promedica health system, inc. Entities.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 85% 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.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and a relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 55
- Transparency & Controls: 69
- Accountability: 32
- Sustainability: 93
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 50.4%; rating input score 50
- Program expense ratio: 69.2%; rating input score 69
- Fundraising efficiency: $10.5 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 88.2%; rating input score 88; 2nd 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: 96.9%; rating input score 97; 27th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
- 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: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 40.4%; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 20.35; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0.3%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -1.2% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 1.5% per year; rating input score 100; 15th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 4% per year; rating input score 100; 29th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 50.4% of revenue deployed · 69.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 0 of 5 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $13.4M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $3.1M · 8 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 34 of 36 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 13 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 21 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 89 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.
- High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 50/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 40/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.