Acacia Creek a Masonic Senior Living Community at Union City
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 204688615
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2008
- Location
- San Francisco, CA, USA
- Phone
- 5104296479
- Rating
- 82
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Supportive Housing for Older Adults
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $14,401,964
- Expenses
- $17,030,432
- Assets
- $84,429,696
- Liabilities
- $155,990,386
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
17 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- CHARLES W MAJOR (PRESIDENT (THRU 11/24))
- SANDRA SIMON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
- TERRY QUIGLEY (PRESIDENT & CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- TERRY QUIGLEY (PRESIDENT & CEO): $606,177 total reported compensation
- ALLAN L CASALOU (GRAND SECRETARY): $429,997 total reported compensation
- CAROL R HUNTER (VP & CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $368,833 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Acacia creek enriches the independence, well-being and security of senior residents through exceptional services and excellent care based on masonic values.
What it reported doing in 2024
Operation of continuing care retirement community (adult residential service): acacia creek follows an "aging in place" approach to care and services. This means we try to bring needed services to residents instead of having them go to the services. Residents enjoy the security of knowing that multiple levels of care will be available to them on the same campus. Acacia creek offers a variety of living accommodations, fine amenities, a comprehensive wellness program and several types of support and health care.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 69% 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.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and assets have declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 86
- Transparency & Controls: 79
- Accountability: 90
- Sustainability: 34
- Growth: 80
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 92.4%; rating input score 92
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Pass
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- 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: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 17th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 9 of 9 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: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -18.3%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.96; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.85; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 4.3%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 4.1% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 9.2% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -1.5% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 92.4% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 5 of 6 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $15.7M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $606K · 17 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $198K reported
- Consistency: 31 of 32 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 5 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.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 5/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 1/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.