District of Columbia Hospital Association
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 521135713
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Washington, DC, USA
- Phone
- 2026821581
- Rating confidence
- Limited
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $7,243,983
- Expenses
- $7,062,233
- Assets
- $5,656,181
- Liabilities
- $2,134,252
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
25 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JACQUELINE BOWENS (PRESIDENT & CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- JACQUELINE BOWENS (PRESIDENT & CEO): $584,161 total reported compensation
- JUSTIN PALMER (VP PUBLIC POLICY & EXTERNA): $195,604 total reported compensation
- JOHN NORMAN (VP FINANCE & ADMINISTRATIO): $185,637 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To provide leadership in improving the health care system in the district of columbia; advocate for the interests of member hospitals as they support the interests of the community; and encourage health services research and education.
What it reported doing in 2024
Advocacy, data collection, publications and sales - advocate for dc hospitals and healthcare, develop advocacy materials. Identify and monitor all legislative and regulatory policies, programs and proposals which may have an impact on health care services in the district of columbia, including all district, federal, private payor, and fiscal intermediary activities which represent a potential impact on the financial viability of district hospitals. Disseminate data information, and publications. Collect and manage hospital data (utilization and financial) for 16 hospitals. Manage hospital data requests for research by members and other interested parties. Produce advocacy publications (the dch advocate, advocacy agenda, annual report, utilization reports, financial indicators and membership directory).
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
The verdict
- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
- Transparency & Controls: 85
- Accountability: 77
- Sustainability: 34
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: Limited
- Program expense ratio: Limited
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 84.6%; rating input score 85; 1st 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; 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 4 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 44
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 2.5%; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.8; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.38; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 20%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: 8.1% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 4.7% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
- Governance: 17 of 17 board members independent · 4 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments
- Leadership: top reported pay $584K · 25 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $700K reported
- Consistency: 13 of 15 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 12 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 8 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 3 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.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 8 not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 43/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 30/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 12/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 28/100.