Ole Health Nmtc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 815395044
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2017–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Napa, CA, USA
- Phone
- 7072541770
- Rating
- 56
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Single Organization Support
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $24,104,065
- Expenses
- $1,012,355
- Assets
- $24,453,699
- Liabilities
- $6,590,605
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
7 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- ALICIA HARDY (PRESIDENT/CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- ALICIA HARDY (PRESIDENT/CEO): $484,654 total reported compensation
- ROSE MACISAAC (TREASURER/CFO): $438,238 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 specific purpose of this corporation is to support the charitable purposes of ole health (dba communicare+ole) and ole health foundation, including, without limitation, to develop a 30,000 square foot health care facility with primary, behavioral, nutritional, dental, prenatal, pharmacy and vision services, on property located at 300 hartle court in napa, California. Ole health's (dba communicare+ole) charitable purpose is to engage in providing high quality, comprehensive, prevention-oriented primary care services to the medically underserved in the state of California, and to carry on other charitable activities allowed by law, as determined by the board of directors.
What it reported doing in 2024
Ole health nmtc supports the charitable purposes of ole health (dba communicare+ole) by financing the construction of, and holding title to, the south napa campus of communicare+ole, which opened in may 2019.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Other-operating. 98% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
- 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. 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: 36
- Transparency & Controls: 60
- Accountability: 74
- Sustainability: 88
- Growth: 80
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 4.2%; rating input score 4
- Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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; 12th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 95.8%; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 24.16; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.27; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 4.4%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 35.4% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 58.1% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -4.9% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 4.2% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 5 of 7 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $485K · 7 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 16 of 16 current checks pass
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
- Filing history: 8 filing years from 2017 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Related organizations: 3 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 4/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 50/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.