The Sacramento Society for Medical Improvement

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
941149667
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Sacramento, CA, USA
Phone
9164515235
Rating confidence
Limited

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,110,071
Expenses
$1,620,903
Assets
$6,789,060
Liabilities
$1,424,614

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ADAM P DOUGHERTY (PRESIDENT)
  • RODERICK VITANGCOL (PRESIDENT - ELECT)
  • VANESSA WALKER (IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT)
  • AILEEN E WETZEL (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)

Highest reported compensation

  • AILEEN E WETZEL (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $577,040 total reported compensation
  • CHRISTINE STINCELLI (ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR): $157,253 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The society's mission is to promote the art and science of quality medical care and to enhance the physical and mental health of the entire community.

What it reported doing in 2025

The organization brings together physicians to promote the health and well-being of physicians and the patients they serve. With over 6,500 physician members in the sacramento region, the organziation provides advocacy, programs and services to promote access to quality medical care and to help physicians reclaim the joy of practicing medicine. The organization provides governance activities including board and committee related activities, the eleventh district California medical association delegation, membership, and other related core activities.the organization provides communication activities including producing the society's periodical magazine 'sierra sacramento valley medicine', 'ssv medical society news', social media content and other editorial and information dissemination operations including an increasingly active presence on the internet.the organization also provides other community services, which includes support rendered to various community outreach programs.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 82% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 72
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 63
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 23.2%; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.19; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.21; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 45.3%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3% per year; rating input score 100; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.4% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.9% per year; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $577K · 17 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 12 of 13 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 2/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 34/100.