Alexian Brothers Senior Neighbors

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
620646376
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2011
Forms available
Form 990 2011
Location
Chattanooga, TN, USA
Phone
4237556100
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Senior Centers
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,525,439
Expenses
$1,605,821
Assets
$1,738,180
Liabilities
$221,016

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2011. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2011. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Alexian Brothers Senior Neighbors ("ABSN") carries out the healing mission of the Catholic Chruch as an Alexian Brothers ministry by identifying and developing effective responses to the health and housing needs of those we are called to serve.

What it reported doing in 2011

The Senior Community Service Employment Program ("SCSEP") sponsored by ABSN, places senior community participants (Senior Aides) in government and non-profit agencies throughout Chattanooga and Hamilton County, TN. Senior Aides work up to 20 hours per week in a paid job training program. SCSEP also provides information to the Senior Aides about employment opportunities for placement into unsubsidized jobs. Through job training assignments the Senior Aides gain confidence, enhance their incomes, learn valuable employment skills and support their communities. SCSEP is funded under Title V of the Older Americans Act and serves low-income individuals who are 55 years of age or older. The program has two purposes: To provide useful community services and to foster individual economic self-sufficiency through training and job placement in unsubsidized employment. In 2011, SCSEP helped to fund over 100,000 hours in job training hours.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 73% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 81
  • Sustainability: 33
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 60th 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: Scored; rating input score 0

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 75%; rating input score 75; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -5.3%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.08; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.13; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 18.4%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -22.8% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -4.4% per year; rating input score 0; 27th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 9 of 12 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1.1M · 18 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2010 to 2011
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • Related organizations: 35 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.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 24/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 48/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 14/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 52/100.