Sentara
Legal name: Sentara Health
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 521271901
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Jun 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
- Location
- Virginia Beach, VA, USA
- Phone
- 7574557020
- Rating
- 85
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Community Health Systems
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,261,880,759
- Expenses
- $443,536,160
- Assets
- $7,237,302,464
- Liabilities
- $1,998,460,849
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
34 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- DENNIS A MATHEIS (PRESIDENT/CEO/EX-OFFICIO DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- DENNIS A MATHEIS (PRESIDENT/CEO/EX-OFFICIO DIRECTOR): $6,375,042 total reported compensation
- ROBERT A BROERMANN (CFO/EVP): $3,456,699 total reported compensation
- HOWARD KERN (FORMER OFFICER): $3,383,320 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Our Mission: We improve health every day. Sentara Norfolk General Hospital revives support group for burn, trauma survivorsJune 28, 2026 Sentara Norfolk General Hospital has revived its trauma peer support group, offering former patients a monthly space to heal, connect, and cope with the lasting effects of trauma. Professional studio headshot of Michael Cole, executive vice president and president of Sentara Health Plans, wearing a dark business jacket and light blue collared shirt against a gray background, facing the camera in a corporate portrait style.
What it reported doing in 2024
See schedule o
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 65% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 83% 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
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 86
- Transparency & Controls: 75
- Accountability: 96
- Sustainability: 82
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 86.3%; rating input score 86
- Program expense ratio: 86.3%; rating input score 86
- Fundraising efficiency: $89.34 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 25th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Pass
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
- Grant itemization coverage: 98.1%; rating input score 98; 34th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 44th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- 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: 64.9%; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 16.32; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.28; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 7.6%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 13.1% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 13.9% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 9.3% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 4 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 86.3% of revenue deployed · 86.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 14 of 15 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $382.8M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $6.4M · 34 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $27.1M reported
- Consistency: 40 of 41 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 11 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 356 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 395 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.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
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 — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 6/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 59/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.