New Mexico Chronic Disease Prevention Council

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
464215344
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2022
Forms available
Form 990 2022, Form 990-N 2014
Location
Albuquerque, NM, USA
Phone
5054635300
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public Health Program (Includes General Health and Wellness Promotion Services)

Reported finances

Revenue
$384,591
Expenses
$373,247
Assets
$12,231
Liabilities
$3,779

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • VALERIE QUINTANA (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • LAUREL MCCLOSKEY (EXECUTIVE DI): $95,314 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of the New Mexico chronic disease prevention council (cdpc) is to reduce common risk factors for the chronic diseases of arthritis, cancer, cardiovascular disease, diabetes, lung disease, and osteoporosis by: -advocating for prevention policies and programs; -facilitating collaboration among agencies and organizations working to prevent and/or manage chronic disease; -supporting initiatives to understand, identify, and address social determinants that impact chronic disease. As identified by the national accociation of chronic disease directors.

What it reported doing in 2022

Phrma grant: phrma works to drive patient-centered progress in innovation, affordability and access to life saving prescription medicines. This grant supports the workgroups of the chronic disease prevention council: heart disease and stroke; prevent diabetes; and health equity. For the heart disease and stroke workgroup. Funds specifically provide support for printing and distribution of a fact sheet that is included in food bank boxes covering diabetes care related to covid-19 protocols. For the prevent diabetes workgroup, funds are used for creating and promoting a two-webinar series called "food as medicine" to let patients know about the national diabetes prevention program and the diabetes self-management education series. For the health equity workgroup, funds ware used for project outcomes for the advocacy & action; education; and collaboration committees, including materials and event support with stipends and community outreach.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 99% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 71% for direct work, and 29% for affiliated organizations.

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 total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 85
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 27
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 84.8%; rating input score 85
  • Program expense ratio: 87.3%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: $66.16 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 2.9%; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.03; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.31; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 25.5%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.2% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.3% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -16.6% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 84.8% of revenue deployed · 87.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $326K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $95K · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 22 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2015 to 2022
  • 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: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 3/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 48/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 14/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 17/100.