Roger Williams Medical Associates Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
203346936
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2013
Forms available
Form 990 2013
Location
Providence, RI, USA
Phone
4014563312
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Group Health Practice (Health Maintenance Organizations)

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,636,591
Expenses
$4,645,338
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KENNETH H BELCHER (PRESIDENT AND CEO CCHP)

Highest reported compensation

  • VINCENT ARMENIO (PHYSICIAN): $506,981 total reported compensation
  • KENNETH H BELCHER (PRESIDENT AND CEO CCHP): $478,367 total reported compensation
  • MICHAEL CONKLIN JR (CFO/TREASURER CCHP): $403,291 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Roger williams medical associates' mission as a community healthcare provider is to arrange for the provision of healthcare services in the communities served by chartercare health partners system.

What it reported doing in 2013

Roger williams medical associates is a physician group that arranges for the provision of medical care and related healthcare services in the communities served by roger williams medical center through arrangements with healthcare professionals without regard to race, color, creed, sex, age, or ability to pay for services consistent with and in furtherance of the charitable purposes of chartercare health partners system.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 96% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program 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.

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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 88
  • Accountability: 18
  • Sustainability: 1
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 44
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -76.2%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 33%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 61.4% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -9.2% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 3 board members independent · 4 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $4.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $507K · 11 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 16 of 16 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2009 to 2013
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 11 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.

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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.