Trimedx Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
201643383
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Indianapolis, IN, USA
Phone
3172751555
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$562,250
Expenses
$340,698
Assets
$3,581,249
Liabilities
$10,301

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Audra Plopper (Foundation Director): $104,108 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

TRIMEDX Foundation supports medical equipment and facility maintenance and repair in underserved communities by developing sustainable and equitable partnerships through innovation, education, and engagement.

What it reported doing in 2024

TRIMEDX Foundation, established in 2004, is committed to raising the standard of healthcare for communities in need. Working in partnership with medical mission organizations, TRIMEDX Foundation provides support related to patient and hospital staff safety, services to help maintain the necessary equipment desperately needed for medical care, and the ability to assist with general maintenance projects. Thanks to generous donations from vendors, healthcare providers, talented technical staff, and others in the community, TRIMEDX Foundation continues to make a global impact to improve the healing environment for those who are less fortunate. In 2024 TRIMEDX Foundation completed 38 mission trips with 109 volunteers that gave 3,100+ hours.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 80% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 85% 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 the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 70
  • Transparency & Controls: 55
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 79
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 68.9%; rating input score 69
  • Program expense ratio: 76.7%; rating input score 77
  • Fundraising efficiency: $15.79 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 16th 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: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: 88.3%; rating input score 88; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 39.4%; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 10.51; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 30.6%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 14.2% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.7% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13.1% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 68.9% of revenue deployed · 76.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $261K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $104K · 10 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 42 of 43 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 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 — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 52/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.