Quality Care Network

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
260567161
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2016–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2015, Form 990-EZ 2016
Location
Phoenix, AZ, USA
Phone
6025678351
Rating
33
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$6,691
Expenses
$1,039,568
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

People named in this filing

  • Michael Hughes (Chair)
  • Lane Barker (Director)
  • KurT Sheppard (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-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Quality care network, through its providers, strengthens the community by offering high quality behavioral health services to children and families throughout maricopa county. We believe in "building hope....strengthening lives."

What it reported doing in 2016

During July 2015, QCN received notice from MERCY MARICOPA INTEGRATED CARE ("MMIC") that they would discontinue funding OF the high needs Case management specialty services AFTER THE CONTRACT END-DATE OF September 30, 2015. The QCN board of directors decided to discontinue operations with cancellation of this contract. On September 29, 2017, the organization filed articles of dissolution. See Schedule N for additional information.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 76% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 7
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -15,436.8%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -151% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -82.8% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.