Colorado Pediatric Collaborative

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
300678460
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2017
Forms available
Form 990 2017
Location
Aurora, CO, USA
Phone
7207776861
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Labor Unions

Reported finances

Revenue
$298,827
Expenses
$794,407
Assets
$1,217,719
Liabilities
$5,169

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

People named in this filing

  • ANDREW BAUER MD (CHAIRMAN)
  • JEFFREY HARRINGTON (SECRETARY/TREASURER)
  • ROBERT KING MD (BOARD MEMBER)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To improve the quality and coordination of care for children in Colorado

What it reported doing in 2017

Cpc focuses on supporting practices with achieving the triple aim, a concept developed by the institute for healthcare improvement. The goal of the triple aim is to improve the health of the population, to enhance the patient experience of care (including quality, access, and reliability), and to reduce/control the per capita cost of care. During 2017, cpc continued to promote progressive quality and care coordination initiatives which include: immunizations, asthma, and childhood obesity. The initiatives are based on a tested model and core model components that cpc has used to demonstrate improvements in population management and health. Continued on schedule o.nonetheless, cpc's robust clinical initiatives have helped paved the way for transitioning payer reimbursement from a fee-for-service model to one that focuses on quality and improved health outcomes for patients and their families.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 87
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 32
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 94.5%; rating input score 94
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -165.8%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.53; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 12.4% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -36.4% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2.9% per year; rating input score 0; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 94.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $750K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $219K reported
  • Consistency: 19 of 19 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2014 to 2017
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 54/100.