89 South Care Support Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
823380934
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Pittsfield, MA, USA
Phone
4134454056
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,605,952
Expenses
$1,646,220
Assets
$34,207,175
Liabilities
$4,189,119

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • EDWARD FORFA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • JOHN MURPHY (PRESIDENT)
  • MARK GILLIGAN (VICE-PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • EDWARD FORFA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $307,142 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission is to better serve the senior healthcare and service needs at our community. Our services focus on exceptional care and services in the home or other settings where seniors may call home and at the residences of 89 south. Our services and programs are designed to promote independence and well being.

What it reported doing in 2024

89 south care support provides leadership, direction and physical space to support berkshire retirement home, inc., which is a skilled nursing facility providing short-term rehabilitation, long-term care residency, memory care support, palliative care/confort care, outpatient rehabilitation and respite care. In addition, 89 south provides housing and support services to seniors through an 18 unit continuing care retirement community. 17 clients were served during the year.

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.

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 revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 49
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 83
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 47.3%; rating input score 47
  • Program expense ratio: 69.1%; rating input score 69
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 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: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 64.3%; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 20.78; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.12; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9.9%; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 13.5% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -16.4% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.8% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 47.3% of revenue deployed · 69.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $1.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $307K · 6 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2017 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 2 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.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 47/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 30/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 55/100.