New York State Radiological Society

Legal name: The New York State Radiological Society

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237031941
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2025
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Loudonville, NY, USA
Phone
5184286678
Rating
46
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$309,444
Expenses
$290,330
Assets
$1,340,074
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DOUGLAS MINTZ MD (President)
  • DONNA D'ALESSIO MD (Vice President)
  • STAMATIA DESTOUNIS MD (President Elect)

People named in this filing

  • DOUGLAS MINTZ MD (President)
  • SUSAN HOBBS MD (Secretary/Treas)
  • DONNA D'ALESSIO MD (Vice President)

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 New York State Radiological Society is the New York chapter of the American College of Radiology.

What it reported doing in 2025

Each year for the past several years, the society has sponsored and implemented an educational seminar for residents specializing in radiology. Each fall there is a seminar held in New York city. At that seminar, various radiologists present educational topics to radiology residents, and there are sessions on post-graduate education, including fellowships in various sub-specialties in radiology and the parameters of practice within a variety of practice settings, including hospital based groups, private office groups, academic medical centers, and communty hospitals. In addition, a component features attorney and a cpa who discuss matters of interest to beginning radiologists, so that they can understand the issues that will surround their practice environments.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 87% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

MIXED - 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: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 63
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 3rd 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: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 6.2%; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.62; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 1.3% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.7% per year; rating input score 100; 47th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 3 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 30 of 30 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 10 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2013 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 49/100.