Lawrence Memorial Corporation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
222553028
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
New London, CT, USA
Phone
2036880580
Rating
53
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and/or Fund Distribution

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$556,374
Expenses
$6,817
Assets
$87,719,408
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

21 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • RICHARD LISITANO (PRES./CEO/TRUSTEE (CURRENT YR COMP))
  • RICHARD LISITANO (PRES./CEO/TRUSTEE (VESTED DEFERRED))

Highest reported compensation

  • GAIL KOSYLA (TREASURER): $1,988,355 total reported compensation
  • WILLIAM ASELTYNE (SECR./TRUSTEE (CURRENT YR COMP)): $1,721,748 total reported compensation
  • RICHARD LISITANO (PRES./CEO/TRUSTEE (CURRENT YR COMP)): $1,259,425 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Lawrence + memorial corporation upholds, promotes, and furthers the welfare, programs, and activities of lawrence + memorial hospital, lmw healthcare (westerly hospital), and visiting nurse association of southeastern Connecticut, inc.

What it reported doing in 2024

Lawrence + memorial corporation upholds, promotes, and furthers the welfare, programs, and activities of lawrence + memorial hospital, inc. And lmw healthcare, inc. Lawrence + memorial corporation also provides overall direction and control to its affiliates. Its principal activities include supervising the development and investment activities of these affiliated entities.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
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

MIXED - Most filed governance safeguards are in place and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 34
  • Transparency & Controls: 59
  • Accountability: 83
  • Sustainability: 87
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 4.8%; rating input score 5
  • Program expense ratio: 94.9%; rating input score 95
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 71.4%; rating input score 71; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 98.8%; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 12,867.74; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 14,493%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -15.6% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -8.1% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.2% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 4.8% of revenue deployed · 94.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 14 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $6K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $2M · 21 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 13 of 14 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 33 filed related-organization links
  • 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: Mission deployment rate scored 5/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 0/100.