Consortium for Older Adult Wellness

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
260799248
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2017
Forms available
Form 990 2017
Location
Littleton, CO, USA
Phone
3034752183
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public Health Program (Includes General Health and Wellness Promotion Services)

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$558,045
Expenses
$514,462
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LYNN LINZELL (PRESIDENT)
  • LISA HOFSTRA (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • LYNNZY ORR MCINTOSH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • CHRISTINE KATZENMEYER (FORMER EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • CHRISTINE KATZENMEYER (FORMER EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $63,240 total reported compensation
  • LYNNZY ORR MCINTOSH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $54,333 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The consortium for older adult wellness connects health systems to community based organizations, through training and consulting, in the areas of chronic disease self-management and falls prevention in alignment with healthcare transformation.

What it reported doing in 2017

The consortium for older adult wellness trains over 400 professionals per year in evidence-based curriculums and best practices in implementation. In addition to training, over 200 falls prevention classes and over 100 self-management classes are offered in Colorado per year, new curriculums are created, and consulting in clinic-to-community integration is underway nationally.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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. The required major-donor schedule is missing or incomplete and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 77
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 30
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 85.6%; rating input score 86
  • Program expense ratio: 82.3%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5.39 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: No; rating input score 0
  • 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: Fail
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 7.8%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 22.9%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -9.9% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -20.5% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -31.6% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 85.6% of revenue deployed · 82.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $423K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $63K · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2012 to 2017
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Major donor itemization scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 21/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 10/100.