Trinity Health of New England Provider Network Organization Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
061450168
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Hartford, CT, USA
Phone
8607144000
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$273,364,186
Expenses
$359,738,430
Assets
$37,340,123
Liabilities
$146,853,834

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

Leadership & pay

29 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DEBORAH BITSOLI (DIR;TH OF NE MEDICAL GROUP PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • SHADY MACARON MD (DIRECTOR; MEDICAL DIRECTOR - SURGERY): $2,022,306 total reported compensation
  • SAMUEL BUONOCORE MD (PLASTIC SURGEON): $1,668,496 total reported compensation
  • WESS COHEN MD (PLASTIC SURGEON): $1,616,288 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

We, trinity health of new england and trinity health, serve together in the spirit of the gospel as a compassionate and transforming healing presence within our communities. Trinity health of new england provider network organization is a member of trinity health of new england and trinity health.

What it reported doing in 2024

Trinity health of new england provider network organization employs physicians and physician assistants who provide medical services in the greater hartford Connecticut community. The organization also conducts teaching and education programs for medical students and residents in support of the trinity health of new england health system.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 82% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 33
  • Sustainability: 12
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 96.3%; rating input score 96
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 7.7%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -31.6%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.1; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 3.93; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0.4%; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 12.7% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 11.5% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.2% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 96.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 1 of 13 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $346.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $2M · 29 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $18.3M reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 308 filed related-organization links
  • 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: Independent voting board scored 8/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 3/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 1/100.