Riverside Healthcare Association Inc Group

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
901000718
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Newport News, VA, USA
Phone
7578757545
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,523,395,459
Expenses
$2,463,979,009
Assets
$1,793,529,397
Liabilities
$1,107,731,329

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

Leadership & pay

162 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MICHAEL J DACEY MD (BOARD MEMBER/Chief Executive Officer)
  • ADRIA NICOLE VANHOOZIER (PRESIDENT, RDHW)
  • EDWARD HECKLER (PRESIDENT, RHS LIFELONG HEALTH)
  • JESSICA D MACALINO (RSH PRESIDENT)
  • MICHAEL SEIJI OSHIKI MD (President, RRMC)
  • NICOLAS R CHUQUIN (President, RSMH)

Highest reported compensation

  • DEAN KOSTOV (Physician Specialty): $2,642,681 total reported compensation
  • JOHN LAMM (Physician Specialty): $2,485,812 total reported compensation
  • ROMNEY ANDERSEN (Physician Specialty): $2,310,097 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 care for others as we would care for those we love - to enhance their well-being and improve their health.

What it reported doing in 2024

General hospital, long-term care and physician services provided to the community: 3,285,921 persons were benefited in 2024 with quantifiable community benefits of $289,826,198.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 99% of the money available for current operations came from other operating 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 73
  • Transparency & Controls: 69
  • Accountability: 75
  • Sustainability: 39
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 81.4%; rating input score 81
  • Program expense ratio: 82.2%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: $2.58 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 86.7%; rating input score 87; 1st 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: 90.7%; rating input score 91; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 80.2%; rating input score 80; 29th 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: 2.4%; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.73; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.62; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.2%; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.2% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.8% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.4% per year; rating input score 100; 47th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 81.4% of revenue deployed · 82.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 146 of 182 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2B in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $2.6M · 162 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $122.9M reported
  • Consistency: 44 of 46 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 11 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 130 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 44 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 8/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 9 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 44/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 29/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 27/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 52/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.