Tri County Care Management Organization

Legal name: Tri County Care Management Organization Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
204010173
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Branchburg, NJ, USA
Phone
(908) 526-3900 Option 8
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Mental Health Treatment F31 Psychiatric, Mental Health Hospital

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$12,218,883
Expenses
$11,874,939
Assets
$4,181,433
Liabilities
$2,615,126

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JAMES PARAUDA (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)

Highest reported compensation

  • JAMES PARAUDA (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $201,810 total reported compensation
  • MATTHEW A LAROCHE (CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER): $154,463 total reported compensation
  • AILEEN T ARSENAULT (CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $128,435 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Our work is grounded in keeping youth safe, healthy and connected and keeping families strong.

What it reported doing in 2024

In affiliation with our system of care and community partners, tri county care management organization brings together resources to meet the current needs of children and their families experiencing complex behavioral, emotional, social, and mental health challenges. Tri county care management organization's services are available to all youth in somerset, hunterdon and warren county regardless of income. Tri county care management organization helps build a healthier community where youth and families can thrive.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 93% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 96% 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. Total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 66
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 33
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 73.8%; rating input score 74
  • Program expense ratio: 76.1%; rating input score 76
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • 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: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 2.8%; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.35; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.63; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.1%; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 10.3% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.2% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 16% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 4 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 3 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 73.8% of revenue deployed · 76.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $202K · 16 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 34 of 34 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 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.

  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 9/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 46/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 21/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 50/100.