Texas Institute for Graduate Medical Ed

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
811424767
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2016
Location
San Antonio, TX, USA
Phone
2108296037
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Alliance/Advocacy Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$15,385,128
Expenses
$15,030,806
Assets
$7,733,514
Liabilities
$2,214,727

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DR MICHAEL J MOHR (President/CHAIR/EXEC.DIR.)

Highest reported compensation

  • DR DARRELL L HAYDON (DIRECTOR/TREASURER (Until 08/2024)): $800,574 total reported compensation
  • DR JOHN T PHAM (DIRECTOR/VICE CHAIR): $459,041 total reported compensation
  • DR DIMITRI TAMALIS (DIRECTOR/INTERIM PROVOST (UNTIL 05/2025)): $365,776 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 Texas Institute for Graduate Medical Education and Research is TO PROMOTE, SUPPORT AND CONTRIBUTE TO THE CONTINUUM OF MEDICAL EDUCATION WITH A FOCUS ON EXCELLENCE IN POSTDOCTORAL TRAINING.

What it reported doing in 2024

Texas institute for graduate medical education and research (tigmer) is a consortium between community-based hospitals, federally qualified health center and the university of the incarnate word school of osteopathic medicine (uiwsom) in san antonio, tx (a related entity). Tigmer provides graduate medical education in family medicine, sports medicine, internal medicine and psychiatry in south and central Texas for graduates of university of the incarnate word and non affiliated medical schools. As a gme consortium, academic and clinical institutions will be able to share resources and expertise to develop and maintain the highest quality community-based postgraduate medical education in the region. Academic and clinical institutions will be able to share resources and expertise to develop and maintain the highest quality community-based postgraduate medical education in the region.

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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 23
  • Sustainability: 40
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 97.7%; rating input score 98
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Scored; rating input score 0

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 56
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • 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: 2.3%; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.51; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.29; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.3%; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 26.1% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 25.3% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 27.9% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 97.7% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 5 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $15M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $801K · 6 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 4 contractors listed · $1.2M reported
  • Consistency: 27 of 28 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2016 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 43/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 16/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 48/100.