Project Care of the Greater Virginia Peninsula Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 273518508
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2011–2014
- Forms available
- Form 990 2014
- Location
- Newport News, VA, USA
- Phone
- 7575948413
- Rating
- 79
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Health, General and Financing
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $124,565
- Expenses
- $189,826
- Assets
- $30,819
- Liabilities
- $6,739
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
12 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- DR NZINGA TEULE-HEKIMA (PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- CINDY DEVLIN (DIRECTOR)
- DR WAYNE REYNOLDS (DIRECTOR)
- CHARLIE GRAHAM (TREASURER)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Project care of the greater Virginia peninsula is a not-for-profit organization that links the low-income uninsured residents of our community with needed primary and specialty medical care. The project partners with nine safety-net clinic organizations (the bon secours care-a-van, the community free clinic of newport news, lackey free clinic, gloucester- mathews free clinic, h.e.l.p. Free clinic, olde towne medical center, angels of mercy free clinic, the peninsula institute for community health, and the tappahannock free clinic) and all three local hospital systems (bon secours of hampton roads, riverside health system, and sentara health care), as well as multiple physicians who provide primary or specialty services to patients in their offices. The project serves residents of the counties of new kent, king william, king and queen, essex, mathews, gloucester, james city, and york, and those of the cities of williamsburg, newport news, poquoson, and hampton. Patients who meet the pro
What it reported doing in 2014
In 2014, 3476 patients received primary care services through the project's partners.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- 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. Expenses are high relative to revenue and program spending has declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 79
- Transparency & Controls: 92
- Accountability: 94
- Sustainability: 16
- Growth: 0
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 68.5%; rating input score 69
- 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: 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: 6 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 86
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -52.4%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.16; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.22; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -29.8% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -25.1% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -40% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 68.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 6 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $130K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
- Consistency: 19 of 19 current checks pass
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 4 filing years from 2011 to 2014
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 4/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 10/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 26/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.