New Hampshire Voices for Health
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 274348113
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2011–2015
- Forms available
- Form 990 2015
- Location
- Concord, NH, USA
- Phone
- 6033694767
- Rating
- 80
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Research Institutes and/or Public Policy Analysis
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $436,476
- Expenses
- $555,188
- Assets
- $166,877
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
14 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- SUSAN SMITH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- SUSAN SMITH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $83,200 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
It is the mission of nh voices for health to advance public policy and systems change through advocacy and coordination of a network of consumer and advocacy organizations committed to securing quality, affordable health care for all in New Hampshire. Through coordination of consumer voices, nh voices for health advances public policy and health systems change to achieve the shared goal of quality, affordable health care for all.
What it reported doing in 2015
Networking and collaboration - core to all of voices' efforts is fostering strong collaboration and convening a diverse range of health care stakeholders. Voices draws upon the expertise of and, relationships with, our network to identify common ground, agendas, and opportunities to advance good public health care policy. Importantly, voices is a non-partisan convener and has excelled at pulling people representing very diverse interests together to find a shared vision for high impact and/or pressing health care issues. Voices was a lead participant in a statewide coalition for effective collaboration and alignment of action and messaging around nhhpp. Voices developed a robust story-bank of nhhpp enrollees who could through their own experiences on the program; tell the story of its success. Voices collaborated with community health centers and other community safety net organizations in hosting communications training to promote awareness that the nhhpp was in danger of ending and for individuals to learn how to advocate for themselves for the reauthorization.this storybank was utilized by the larger state coalition working to reauthorize medicaid expansion. Enrollees were able to be highlighted in a variety of ways to make the case for reauthorization. Our partnership to increase coverage in communities of color included key individuals and organizations within the latino and african american communities of nh. Voices formed regional collaboratives of marketplace assisters and jointly promoted and participated in community events and education sessions.the consumer assistance task force continued to convene consumer assistance entities/networks to support aca-related efforts in nh and share expertise and technical assistance to meet challenges in enrollment. The catf also helped mainstream organizations to effectively reach, serve, and enroll minority populations. With the nhhpp requiring enrollees to transition into the marketplace in january, 2016, voices worked closely with assister organizations and individuals in the fall of 2015 to help prepare for a smooth transition for nhhpp enrollees into marketplace plans.
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 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
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 82
- Transparency & Controls: 92
- Accountability: 79
- Sustainability: 23
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 78.9%; rating input score 79
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- 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: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -27.2%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.3; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 15%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: 6.5% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 2.5% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 78.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $438K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $83K · 14 people listed
- Consistency: 23 of 23 current checks pass
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 2 filing years from 2011 to 2015
- 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.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 10/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 17/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 27/100.