Costs of Care Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
272898108
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2022, Form 990-N 2014
Location
Cambridge, MA, USA
Phone
7327783227
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public Health Program (Includes General Health and Wellness Promotion Services)

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$324,177
Expenses
$199,643
Assets
$194,927
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CHRIS MORIATES MD (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • SEPTEMBER WALLINGFORD RN MSN (DEPUTY DIRECTOR): $41,100 total reported compensation
  • CHRIS MORIATES MD (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $15,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Costs of care is dedicated to cultivating change agents who will lead the creation of a more affordable and equitable health system.

What it reported doing in 2025

Affordability moonshot: the affordability moonshot is a movement to improve patient affordability so that no one should have to choose between their life and their life savings. We are informed by outputs from our previous affordability accelerator, which convened influential experts and stakeholders to work together on developing and disseminating the most promising high-impact and sustainable interventions to improve patient affordability. We utilize our outputs to continue to cultivate change agents who will lead the creation of a more affordable and equitable health system. Our moonshot work includes costs of care fellowships for healthcare providers interested in working with national leaders to promote discussion, training, and dissemination efforts to improve the delivery of more affordable and value-based healthcare. The 2025 fellowship cycle provided 2 such healthcare providers the opportunity to work closely with the costs of care team to move forward research related to high-value care and affordability. Recruitment for the 2026 fellowship cycle will see 1-2 such health care providers interested in moving forward high-value care and affordability in any medical specialty. The affordability moonshot also incorporates the importance of health systems leadership in improving patient affordability and includes the steven schroeder award for outstanding healthcare ceo, an award we give to recognize a hospital and/or health system ceo who has demonstrated courageous and ethical leadership in addressing the twin issues of affordability and quality of health care in their community. Learn more at costsofcare.org and moonshot.costsofcare.org

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 96% 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 41
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 63
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 36.7%; rating input score 37
  • Program expense ratio: 59.5%; rating input score 60
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 56
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 38.4%; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.98; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 28.1%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.2% per year; rating input score 100; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 24.1% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.4% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 36.7% of revenue deployed · 59.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $119K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $41K · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 20 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2023 to 2025
  • 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.

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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 37/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 40/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 12/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.