911 Health Watch Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
364700889
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2023
Location
Albany, NY, USA
Phone
6466349103
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Salvation Army

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$225,716
Expenses
$123,113
Assets
$298,793
Liabilities
$9,000

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MARGARET SEMINARIO (PRESIDENT/DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • BENJAMIN CHEVAT (EXECUTIVE DIR.): $80,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To ensure the implementation of the james zadroga 9/11 health and compensation act of 2010, federal legislation that (1) established the world trade center health program to provide medical monitoring and treatment benefits to eligible world trade center responders and residents of lower manhattan and parts of brooklyn affected by the september 11, 2001 world trade center attacks, and (2) reopened the september 11th victims compensation fund of 2001.

What it reported doing in 2025

911 health watch inc. Educated the public about programs to implement the james zadroga 911 health and compensation acts, to ensure 9/11 responders and survivors receive program benefits as the statute envisioned. To ensure proper implementation of the act, the corporation investigated and publicized problems in delivering services, and suggested ways to improve the programs. The corporation also worked to provide guidance to individual 9/11 responders and survivors, to inform the larger 9/11 community, and to educate the american public at large.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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 - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 54
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 64
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 40.6%; rating input score 41
  • Program expense ratio: 74.4%; rating input score 74
  • Fundraising efficiency: $26.08 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 45.5%; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.43; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 65%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -11.8% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.3% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.5% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 40.6% of revenue deployed · 74.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $92K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $80K · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 22 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 41/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 31/100.