National Ehealth Collaborative Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
263006962
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2013
Forms available
Form 990 2013
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
8778356506
Rating
67
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Labor Unions

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,274,702
Expenses
$1,420,596
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

20 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KATE BERRY (CEO/SECRETAR)

Highest reported compensation

  • KATE BERRY (CEO/SECRETAR): $433,572 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

National ehealth collaborative is a public-private partnership that accelerates secure and meaningful use of health information technology through education and stakeholder engagement to advance health and transform healthcare.

What it reported doing in 2013

Nehc university throughout 2013, nehc conducted 59 virtual webinars as part of the nehc university program. This program is focused on educating stakeholders about various aspects of the adoption and effective use of health information exchange (hie) and health information technology, and how these tools can be used to improve the nation's health and healthcare. Over the 2012 year, these open forums welcomed about 60 speakers including government officials, industry representatives, and prominent experts to participate on discussion panels, make educational presentations and engage in dialogue with program attendees. More than 12,067 diverse stakeholders attended nehc university programs in 2013. Nehc promoted each webinar to its database of approximately 9,400 people.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 64% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 77
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 7
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 79.3%; rating input score 79
  • Program expense ratio: 71.2%; rating input score 71
  • Fundraising efficiency: $105.24 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 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 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -11.4%; rating input score 13; 13th 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: 30.5%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -17.3% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -61.6% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 79.3% of revenue deployed · 71.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 19 of 19 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $434K · 20 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2011 to 2013
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 13/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.