North Carolina Telehealth Network Association
Legal name: Nc Telehealth Network Association
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 832008634
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2019–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Aug 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Concord, NC, USA
- Phone
- 9193603000
- Rating
- 68
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Management & Technical Assistance
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,325,617
- Expenses
- $1,006,325
- Assets
- $3,561,944
- Liabilities
- $2,069,391
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
19 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JOHN GRAHAM (PRESIDENT)
- TRACY OLSON (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)
Highest reported compensation
- TRACY OLSON (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $216,257 total reported compensation
- JORDAN ROGERS (RELATIONSHIP MARKETING DIRECTOR): $123,320 total reported compensation
- ANGEL VANOVER (OPERATIONS DIRECTOR): $116,418 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The North Carolina Telehealth Network Association (NCTNA) is a dynamic, member-led nonprofit that works to connect and empower North Carolina’s public and non-profit healthcare providers with medical-grade broadband connectivity services.
What it reported doing in 2024
In fiscal year 2025, the nc telehealth network association (nctna) provided over $5m dollars in healthcare connect fund discounts to our eligible members and centralized contract administration and invoicing for over 450 broadband services.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 79% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 97% 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. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 61
- Transparency & Controls: 71
- Accountability: 71
- Sustainability: 63
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 59.6%; rating input score 60
- Program expense ratio: 83.5%; rating input score 83
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 92.6%; rating input score 93; 40th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 50%; rating input score 50; 11th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 8 of 8 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: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 24.1%; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.54; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.58; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 45.3%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 11% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 4.4% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 5% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 3 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 59.6% of revenue deployed · 83.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 8 of 16 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $840K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $216K · 19 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 31 of 32 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 6 filing years from 2019 to 2024
- 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.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- Review — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 50/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 2/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 13/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.