Hartford Health Works Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
474296959
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2016
Location
Chester, CT, USA
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Economic Development

Reported finances

Revenue
$0
Expenses
$135,381
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MARK C BORTON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

People named in this filing

  • MARK C BORTON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • THERESA WILSON (TREASURERDIRECTOR)
  • TIMOTHY GIFFORD (SECRETARYDIRECTOR)

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 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Catalyst and facilitator of regional collaboration for economic development through precision manufacturing job training and company recruiting.

What it reported doing in 2016

Workforce development and education: worked in collaboration with the workforce investment board and community college system to establish a precision manufacturing training center including ongoing negotiations and plans to purchase and renovate suitable property, and fund raising for same.in collaboration with capital region education council, u of hartford, hartford public schools, and trinity colege, developed bme-4-stem, a junior high school biomedical curriculum development and teacher training program. Pilot of the program was funded with a grant (to trinity college) from the Connecticut health and education funding authority, and run during the summer of 2016.

Operating model

Revenue model
No positive adjusted resources. The filing reports no positive adjusted operating resources.
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

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 46
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 63
  • Sustainability: 8
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: 60%; rating input score 60
  • Fundraising efficiency: $0 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 4; 4th 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: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: Limited
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -90.8% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -200% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -200% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 60% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 6 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $81K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 13 of 13 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2015 to 2016
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 4/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.