Commonwell Health Alliance Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
464151657
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Boston, MA, USA
Phone
9177444999
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Business and Industry

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,225,791
Expenses
$4,266,385
Assets
$3,268,092
Liabilities
$423,708

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • PAUL WILDER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • PAUL WILDER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $405,232 total reported compensation
  • ELIZABETH BUCKLE (DIRECTOR OF PRODUCT): $208,952 total reported compensation
  • COURTNEY BAKER (MARKETING MANAGER): $121,986 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Commonwell health alliance (cha) is a collaborative effort between health information technology suppliers focusing on achieving data liquidity between systems. Cha supports universal access to health data through interoperability. Cha also creates and promotes standards and policies that support a supplier-neutral platform to breakdown the barriers that prevent care providers from effectively sharing health data.

What it reported doing in 2024

Development and delivery of standards, policies, and services, leveraging a supplier-neutral platform, to break down the barriers that currently prevent care providers from effectively sharing health data. The alliance increased the number of companies connecting to our services as members or sublicensees of members to over two dozen companies. Our members have connected over 23,000 healthcare providers to each other who share health data across all facets of healthcare with 100 million records shared every month for the 130 million individuals enrolled in the network.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 98% 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Revenue has declined or grown slowly and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 30
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 94.3%; rating input score 94
  • Program expense ratio: 95.6%; rating input score 96
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • 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: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -1%; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.77; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.13; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 20%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 68.1% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -9.9% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.1% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 94.3% of revenue deployed · 95.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $4.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $405K · 13 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $299K reported
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 30/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 28/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Audit committee oversight not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 12/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 53/100.