Promedica Monroe Cardiology

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
272920342
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Toledo, OH, USA
Phone
4192525772
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Health Treatment Facilities, Primarily Outpatient

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$106,175
Expenses
$429,661
Assets
$124,657
Liabilities
$5,290

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

Leadership & pay

19 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ARTURO POLIZZI (TRUSTEE/CEO)
  • KENT BISHOP (TRUSTEE/ PRESIDENT - PPG/CMO)

Highest reported compensation

  • ARTURO POLIZZI (TRUSTEE/CEO): $3,133,332 total reported compensation
  • KENT BISHOP (TRUSTEE/ PRESIDENT - PPG/CMO): $1,466,293 total reported compensation
  • DAWN BUSKEY (TRUSTEE/CHIEF ACUTE CARE OFFICER): $1,354,936 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

As an integral part of promedica health system, inc., we will be the premier community-based management services organization and provider of related healthcare services for northwest Ohio/southeast Michigan, offering quality, cost-effective, efficient, and value-added services to achieve superior patient satisfaction and a financially viable network of physicians supporting the medical needs of the community.

What it reported doing in 2024

During 2024, physician practices existing in promedica monroe cardiology moved to other promedica entities. Promedica monroe cardiology is now working to wrap up and finalize remaining business operations.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 95% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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 most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 55
  • Accountability: 69
  • Sustainability: 11
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 13th 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: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: No; rating input score 0

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 62.5%; rating input score 62; 17th 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: -304.7%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.29; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 17.8%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -30% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -26.1% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -20.2% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 16 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $430K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $3.1M · 19 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 20 of 21 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 71 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 15/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset 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 21/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 34/100.