Tec Administration Welfare Benefit Trust

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
810727233
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2015
Forms available
Form 990 2015
Location
Wexford, PA, USA
Phone
7249352310
Rating
62
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Insurance Providers

Reported finances

Revenue
$975,552
Expenses
$975,552
Assets
$63,694
Liabilities
$63,694

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

2 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Kurt A Schweiger (Plan Sponsor): $24,069 total reported compensation
  • Dominic Perry (Trustee): $7,251 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To receive voluntary health care insurance contributions from members and distribute payments of such as designated.

What it reported doing in 2015

Voluntary members contributions are received and used for payment of health care benefits of those members and members dependents.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Member-benefit provider. The nonprofit used 100% of its reported program spending for member benefits.

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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 5
  • Sustainability: 27
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 92.1%; rating input score 92
  • Program expense ratio: 92.1%; rating input score 92
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: Limited
  • Governance controls: 1 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Limited
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 0%; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.07; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.2%; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 92.1% of revenue deployed · 92.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 1 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $898K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $24K · 2 people listed
  • Consistency: 14 of 14 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 1 filed schedules
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 37/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 3/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 7/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.