Piedmont Regional Trauma System Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
562036036
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Winstonsalem, NC, USA
Phone
3367163097
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Reported finances

Revenue
$202,294
Expenses
$182,518
Assets
$165,517
Liabilities
$23,230

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JASON HOTH (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • GREG TARLETON (DIRECTOR)
  • GLORIA WHISENHUNT (DIRECTOR)
  • WILLIAM MAYO (DIRECTOR)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To coordinate the development and operations of an integrated trauma system for forsyth county and northwest North Carolina.

What it reported doing in 2024

Emergency medical care: the piedmont regional tauma system, inc. (prts) is organized and operated to coordinate the development and operations of an integrated multi_disciplinary tauma system for forsyth county and other communities of northwest North Carolina. The regional trauma system works to improve the quality and timeliness of emergency care provided to severely injured patients. This improvement is achieved by (1) increasing efficinecy and effectiveness in the allocation of health care resources within forsyth county, (2) reducing the time period between injury and care through increased speed in transporting tauma pients to the appropriate trauma center, and (3) the operation of quality assurance and review programs to ensure optimal performance of the trauma system. Prts is responsible for the development, evaluation, and adjustment of field triage cirteria for use by emergency medical services (ems) personnel within prts. Field triage is defined as the predetermined schematic for patient distribution based upon patient's established medical needs as determined by ems personnel at the location of initial ems intervention. The purpose of field triage is to provide the best care for the trauma patient considering the patient's preferences for care. Prts monitors the efficiency and effectiveness of the trauma system to ensure the system operates at optimal levels.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 99% 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

SUPPORTED - 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 revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 50
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 87.8%; rating input score 88
  • Program expense ratio: 97.1%; rating input score 97
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 9.8%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.91; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.14; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.7% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.1% per year; rating input score 0; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -4.9% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 87.8% of revenue deployed · 97.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $177K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $153K reported
  • Consistency: 17 of 17 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 38/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 23/100.