Advocates for the Aging of Frederick Md Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 465336766
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2022–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2020
- Location
- Frederick, MD, USA
- Phone
- 3016623695
- Rating
- 91
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Alliance/Advocacy
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $179,362
- Expenses
- $170,752
- Assets
- $185,553
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
11 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- MELANIE P COX (PRESIDENT)
- CYNTHIA A POWELL (VICE PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- KARL BICKEL (DIRECTOR)
- KATIE HEMLER (DIRECTOR)
- SARAH MATTHEWS (SECRETARY)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To be a public voice for the needs of low-income and frail seniors, and to facilitate and support partnerships and collaboration between government, for-profit and non-profit organizations to meet those needs.
What it reported doing in 2025
Aers support fund-the goal of the aers support fund at advocates for the aging is to provide services or products that help eligible aged and/or disabled adults to be able to live independently in their homes. Needs are determined on a case-by-case basis using the expertise of our aers professionals.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- 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
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 91
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 55
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 89.4%; rating input score 89
- Program expense ratio: 93.9%; rating input score 94
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 4.8%; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.09; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -11.1% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 9.8% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 32.9% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 89.4% of revenue deployed · 93.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $160K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 11 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 2 filing years from 2022 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
- Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
- 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 — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 44/100.