The Army Retirement Residence Foundation - Potomac

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
541252635
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-PF 2021
Location
Fort Belvoir, VA, USA
Phone
7037812460
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Senior Citizens' Housing/Retirement Communities

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$580,266
Expenses
$378,096
Assets
$5,544,714
Liabilities
$211,100

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

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BG ROBERT JORGENSEN USA RET (PRESIDENT, EXECUTIVE)
  • MG RUSSELL L FUHRMAN USA RET (VICE-PRESIDENT, EXECUTIVE,)
  • DIANA CARDWELL (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • DIANA CARDWELL (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $148,704 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The foundation acts to insure the strength of our community and quality of our residence. It serves all residents in meaningful ways- from providing a supportive, beautiful environment, to helping residents in financial need.

What it reported doing in 2025

Aid in the provision of retirement residences for retired officers and their spouses from the u.s. Uniformed services, cia, fbi, foreign service and other fedral agencies as well as parents of active and retired military personnel and civilians. Acts as a sponsor of the firfax lifecare retirement community (the fairfax), in coordination with sunrise assisted living, inc. (sunrise), the current operator.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 48% for direct work, and 52% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 53
  • Transparency & Controls: 89
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 74
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 55.7%; rating input score 56
  • Program expense ratio: 54.9%; rating input score 55
  • Fundraising efficiency: $9.76 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 97.9%; rating input score 98; 49th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 34.8%; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 14.66; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 39.3%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 32.7% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 30.2% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.8% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 55.7% of revenue deployed · 54.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $208K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $149K · 15 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 26 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2022 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 56/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 55/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 34/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 4/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 46/100.