Sandhills Community Care Network Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
270055838
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2018
Forms available
Form 990 2018
Location
Pinehurst, NC, USA
Phone
9102469806
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community Mental Health Center

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,296,133
Expenses
$5,318,750
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

29 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Tammie McLean (Network Dir.): $168,194 total reported compensation
  • Nydia Mancini (Pharmacist): $145,315 total reported compensation
  • William Stewart (Medical Director): $109,855 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Prior to dissolution on July 8, 2019, CCS sought to improve the health and quality of life of the patients it served by collaborating with patients, health care providers, hospitals, health departments, community partners, and departments of social services to promote medical best practices and reduce care costs using disease management and care management services.

What it reported doing in 2018

Prior to its dissolution in June 2019, the organization provided care management services to more than 70,000 Medicaid enrollees. It worked in partnership with more than 100 primary care and obstetrician practices, hospitals, health departments, departments of social services, and other agencies and organizations to provide cooperative, coordinated care through the Medical Home model. This approach matched each patient with a primary care physician who lead a health care team that addressed the patient's individual needs.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 90% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 65% for direct work, and 35% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The required major-donor schedule is missing or incomplete and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 85
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 4
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 86.8%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: No; rating input score 0
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -61.4%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8%; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.2% per year; rating input score 0; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -10.5% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -41.2% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 86.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 26 of 26 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $4.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $168K · 29 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 25 of 26 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2015 to 2018
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Major donor itemization scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 32/100.