Sacvalley Medshare

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
465423598
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Chico, CA, USA
Phone
5307205997
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community Service Clubs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,478,514
Expenses
$3,186,017
Assets
$3,340,984
Liabilities
$671,616

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

21 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOHN HELVEY (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • JOHN HELVEY (CEO): $211,125 total reported compensation
  • JAMES FORTE (DIRECTOR OF MARKETING): $140,719 total reported compensation
  • JENNIFER INDEN (PROGRAM & PROJECT DIRECTOR): $140,288 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To improve the quality and safety of healthcare across the north central valley, by sharing health information in a secure and efficient fashion between all providers, facilities and patients.

What it reported doing in 2025

Subscription revenues: there are several different fees that sacvalley medshare (svms) charges to its members. Adt and xds fees: these are one time setup fees to setup the alerts system within the dashboard. Occasionally, there will be alerts regarding patient discharges from the hospital. Acutealerts and dashboard fees: these fees vary based on panel size. For alerts, the hospitals submit patient panels to svms. When one of their patients goes into the ed, the svms system notifies them that the patient was admitted to the ed. These fees are paid by some hospitals due to the current dashboard being run by konza and as required by its contract. Initial one-time health information exchange (hie) fees: these are a one-time setup fees for counties specifically.

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 97% 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. Total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 69
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 55
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 67.8%; rating input score 68
  • Program expense ratio: 94.8%; rating input score 95
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 75th 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: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 28.9%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.05; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.2; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 18.9%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.7% per year; rating input score 100; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.5% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 31.9% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 67.8% of revenue deployed · 94.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 17 of 17 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $211K · 21 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $2.3M reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2020 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 35/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Document-retention policy not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 17/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 35/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.