Tulsa County Medical Society Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
730488400
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Tulsa, OK, USA
Phone
9187436184
Rating
46
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$355,585
Expenses
$369,720
Assets
$506,650
Liabilities
$16,202

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • STEPHEN BRUNS MD (President)
  • BRIAN MACHA MD (PAST PRESIDENT)
  • SHARON SMALLWOOD MD (PAST PRESIDENT)
  • JOHN TEDESCO (Vice President)
  • ONDRIA GLEASON MD (PRESIDENT ELECT)

Highest reported compensation

  • MARK MCELREATH (Executive Dir.): $114,374 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To be the advocate for both physician and patient, to support quality health care, to be a leader in health care reform, and to sustain a continuing dialogue between the membership and the community in which we live and work.

What it reported doing in 2024

Membership meetings - these meetings are organized and planned for members throughout each year. In january a meeting is held to provide a legislative forecast for the upcoming session that starts in february. Continuing medical education programs are offered to provide up-to-date evidence based educational presentations. Regular updates are provided from the Oklahoma board of medical licensure and on risk management topics. Programs are also provided on medical office management topics as well as financial planning issues. Medical residents and students who are members of tcms are also invited to the meetings. Tcms has councils and committees that meet on a regular basis for the purpose of reviewing applications of potential new members, resolving grievances filed by patients of tcms member physicians, and reviewing membership services.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 94% 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

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 34
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • 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: Pass
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -4%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.37; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 30.9%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -0.9% per year; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.4% per year; rating input score 100; 30th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $114K · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 11 of 12 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 31/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 49/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 10/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 36/100.