Aging Resources of Central Iowa

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
421183810
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Des Moines, IA, USA
Phone
5156339510
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Senior Centers

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$5,535,366
Expenses
$5,484,114
Assets
$2,488,688
Liabilities
$2,055,476

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

Leadership & pay

19 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOEL OLAH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • JOEL OLAH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $163,262 total reported compensation
  • LESTER BASCOM (FISCAL DIRECTOR): $150,113 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 of aging resources of central Iowa is to lead, advocate, and serve; as well as plan and coordinate resources in the provision of services to older persons in central Iowa, their families, caregivers, or representatives, enabling elders to lead independent, meaningful, and dignified lives in the least restrictive environment.

What it reported doing in 2024

Services to promote independenceadult day care: 1,309 days of service for 76 people chore: 663 hours of service for 42 peopleemergency response systems: 126 months of service for 25 people material aid: 1,357 items for 990 people outreach: 10,838 contacts for 8,096 people personal care/homemaker: 5,524 hours of service for 105 people respite: 2,671 hours of service for 40 people training and education: 280 activities for 21,556 people transportation: 55,793 one way trips for 1,267 people

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 96% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 43% for direct work, and 57% for grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 68
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 29
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 92.7%; rating input score 93
  • Program expense ratio: 93.4%; rating input score 93
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 99.9%; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 0.9%; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.45; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.83; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.7%; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.3% per year; rating input score 100; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.1% per year; rating input score 100; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 14.1% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 92.7% of revenue deployed · 93.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 17 of 17 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $5.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $163K · 19 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 35 of 35 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 18 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 16 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 37/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 15/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 10/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 49/100.