Riverview St Mary's Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 621782683
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Denver, CO, USA
- Phone
- 3038303300
- Rating
- 67
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Housing Development, Construction, Management
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $400,257
- Expenses
- $420,448
- Assets
- $1,417,901
- Liabilities
- $51,905
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
10 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JAMES ALEXANDER (PRESIDENT/DIRECTOR)
- MELISSA CLAYTON (VICE PRESIDENT (OUTGOING))
- KASSIDI BOENING (VICE PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- JAMES ALEXANDER (PRESIDENT/DIRECTOR): $272,883 total reported compensation
- JOE ROSENBLUM (SECRETARY/DIRECTOR): $254,958 total reported compensation
- CHAD PAYNE (TREASURER): $214,612 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Riverview st. Mary's inc., a Tennessee not-for-profit corporation, was organized to construct, own and operate a 38-unit apartment community in knoxville, Tennessee, known as riverview st. Mary's, pursuant to section 202 of the national affordable housing act, as amended.
What it reported doing in 2025
Riverview st. Mary's inc. Was organized on june 5, 1998 as a Tennessee non-stock, nonprofit corporation for the purpose of constructing and operating a rental housing project under section 202 of the national housing act. Such projects are regulated by hud as to rent charges and operating methods. The project consists of 38 units located in knoxville, Tennessee and is currently operating under the name of st. Mary's riverview i apartments.
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. 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: 65
- Accountability: 32
- Sustainability: 37
- Growth: 80
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 97.2%; rating input score 97
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
- 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: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -5%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.37; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 50.2%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 5.8% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 4.9% per year; rating input score 100; 47th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -2.2% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 97.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 0 of 7 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $409K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $273K · 10 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Related organizations: 505 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 0/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 25/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 3/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 30/100.