California Telehealth Network

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
273045436
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2010
Location
Portland, OR, USA
Phone
9163413371
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Nonmonetary Support N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$363,608
Expenses
$807,668
Assets
$539,761
Liabilities
$2,817,998

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

Leadership & pay

20 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • GIL MUNOZ (CHAIR, AMBULATORY CEO STEERING COMM)
  • ABIGAIL SEARS (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)

Highest reported compensation

  • ABIGAIL SEARS (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $920,137 total reported compensation
  • BRENDA GARSKE (CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $488,290 total reported compensation
  • KATHLEEN ELLINGTON (CHIEF OPERATIONS OFFICER): $457,143 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 promote advanced information technologies and services to improve access to high quality healthcare focusing on medically underserved and rural californians.

What it reported doing in 2024

California telehealth network is building healthier communities throughout the state of California by providing:-low cost, reliable medical grade broadband service and applications to meet the needs of any health care provider-secure access to California's over 350 online telehealth communities-broadband subsidy applications filing assistance-telehealth certification and training from ctn's partner association, California telehealth resource center-coordination amongst California's statewide health resources-telehealth grant funding assistance

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 93% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 98% 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. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 85
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 12
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 88.1%; rating input score 88
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th 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: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -122.1%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.67; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 5.22; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 25.2%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -20.3% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -18% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -26.4% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 88.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $712K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $920K · 20 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 5 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 31/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 14/100.