University of Maryland Medical System
Legal name: University of Maryland Medical System Corporation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 521362793
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
- Location
- La Plata, MD, US
- Phone
- 240-337-2430
- Rating
- 84
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Hospital, General
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $2,527,227,702
- Expenses
- $2,448,276,421
- Assets
- $5,251,913,739
- Liabilities
- $3,538,414,817
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
42 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- MOHAN SUNTHA MD (PRESIDENT AND CEO, UMMS)
- BERT W O' MALLEY MD (PRESIDENT & CEO, UMMC)
Highest reported compensation
- MOHAN SUNTHA MD (PRESIDENT AND CEO, UMMS): $3,940,617 total reported compensation
- BERT W O' MALLEY MD (PRESIDENT & CEO, UMMC): $2,016,315 total reported compensation
- ANDREW POLLAK MD (SVP AND CMO): $1,681,723 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 provide Marylanders a better state of care.
What it reported doing in 2024
Umms, a private, non-profit health system, consists of 10 hospitals - ummc, the academic 'hub' - and the 9 community and specialty hospitals throughout the state of Maryland. Ummc is a national and regional referral center for trauma, cancer care, neurocare, cardiac care and heart surgery, women's and children's health and organ transplants. It has one of the most technologically advanced operating room facilities and is internationally recognized for its leadership in developing and performing minimally invasive surgical procedures. Umms provides charity care to patients unable to pay. Charity care for the year ended 6/30/2025 is nearly $20 million.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Other-operating. 97% 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
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 88
- Transparency & Controls: 71
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 54
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 98.6%; rating input score 99
- Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 86.7%; rating input score 87; 1st percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Pass
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
- Grant itemization coverage: 88.8%; rating input score 89; 21st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 3.1%; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.15; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.67; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0.8%; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 5.6% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 4% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 5.6% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 1 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 98.6% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 26 of 26 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.5B in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $3.9M · 42 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $135.8M reported
- Consistency: 36 of 38 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 11 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 48 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 104 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.
- 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.
Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 48/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 23/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Series program expenses within total did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.