The Cardiac Neurodevelopmental Outcome Collaborative

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
811219865
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2016
Location
Richmond, VA, USA
Phone
8045656397
Rating
67
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Heart and Circulatory System Diseases, Disorders

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$319,183
Expenses
$202,446
Assets
$816,043
Liabilities
$81,227

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

Leadership & pay

28 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • STEWART HINCKLEY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

People named in this filing

  • CYNTHIA ORTINAU (CO-CHAIR)
  • NADINE KASPARIAN (CO-CHAIR)
  • SAMANTHA C BUTLER (CO-VICE CHAIR)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

The cnoc is a not-for-profit organization established to determine and implement best practices of neurodevelopmental and psychosocial services for individuals with pediatric and congenital heart disease and their families through clinical, quality improvement, and research initiatives.

What it reported doing in 2025

Cnoc's neurodevelopmental core lab (ndc) and data analysis core (dac) are researching the development of infants, toddlers and preschoolers who have undergone neonatal cardiac surgery using a limited list of demographic, neurodevelopmental, medical history and surgical variables. As initial aims are achieved, neurodevelopmental testing outcomes, quality of life outcomes and medical history data will be added to these efforts.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 95% 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 - 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 55
  • Transparency & Controls: 81
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 72
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 50.1%; rating input score 50
  • Program expense ratio: 83%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 36.6%; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.03; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.1; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -3.6% per year; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.9% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 20.1% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 50.1% of revenue deployed · 83% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 27 of 27 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $168K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 28 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $115K reported
  • Consistency: 18 of 19 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2017 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 50/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 22/100.