Via Vita Health Project Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
920126965
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2020
Forms available
Form 990 2020
Location
Fairbanks, AK, USA
Phone
9074563719
Rating
59
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,452,894
Expenses
$1,735,172
Assets
$3,827,859
Liabilities
$506,022

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • GERALD COLP (PRESIDENT)
  • DAWN TOZIER (VICE PRESIDENT & INCOMING SECRETARY)
  • CHERYL CORRICK (OUTGOING EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • JENNIFER CROSS (INCOMING EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • ALAN CORRICK (INTERIM EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • DANA BROWN (FORMER EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • DANA BROWN (FORMER EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $120,481 total reported compensation
  • CHERYL CORRICK (OUTGOING EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $65,484 total reported compensation
  • JENNIFER CROSS (INCOMING EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $25,624 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Prenatal, childbirth & postpartum care

What it reported doing in 2020

Pregnancy and childbirth services including childbirth training & delivery, medical exams, lab test, providing medical supplies and educational materials; provided to about 200 clients

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 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

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 few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 42
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 69
  • Sustainability: 73
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 30%; rating input score 30
  • Program expense ratio: 76.9%; rating input score 77
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • 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: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: 61%; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.21; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.13; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12.2%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.1% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 14.8% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.5% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 30% of revenue deployed · 76.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $120K · 12 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2009 to 2020
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 30/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 23/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 57/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.