Alzheimer's Community Care Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 311481653
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2014–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- West Palm Beach, FL, USA
- Phone
- 5616832700
- Rating
- 84
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Standard
- Sector
- Alzheimer's Disease
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $7,702,857
- Expenses
- $7,740,017
- Assets
- $5,795,585
- Liabilities
- $2,293,199
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
14 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- KEVIN WRENNE (SECRETARY/FORMER INTERIM CEO)
- DAVID FRANKLIN (PRESIDENT & CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- JACKIE CHONG (EXECUTIVE VP): $134,322 total reported compensation
- KAREN L GILBERT (VP OF EDUCATION AND Q&A): $121,623 total reported compensation
- ALEXANDER GUANARITA (VP OF FINANCE): $120,175 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Alzheimer's community care is dedicated to promoting and providing community-based, family-centered care for patients and their caregivers living with neurocognitive disorders, through the belief, where there is help, there is hope.
What it reported doing in 2024
The case manager is the caregivers advocate and support system. Our case managers collaborate with the caregiver to determine their individual needs and bring them together with other agencies that provide additional services and resources. The case manager also provides much-needed guidance in helping families and caregivers successfully apply for financial assistance through government entities. Whether this funding is provided by the state, local government entities, or through private funds secured by alzheimer's community care, these funds are critical to protecting the well-being of the patients and caregivers.another important service provided on behalf of alzheimer's community care's patient's and caregivers is advocacy on the state level. Over the years the organization has been the driving force in advocating and establishing much needed legislation. We have developed and fostered strong relationships with lawmakers in the state capitol in tallahassee, through our annual advocacy trips.
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.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
STRONG - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 69
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 31
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 70.8%; rating input score 71
- Program expense ratio: 70.4%; rating input score 70
- Fundraising efficiency: $16.07 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- 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: 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: -0.5%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.75; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.4; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 7%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 0.5% per year; rating input score 100; 15th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 0.9% per year; rating input score 100; 15th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 8.3% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 70.8% of revenue deployed · 70.4% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 6 filed program accomplishments · $5.4M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $134K · 14 people listed
- Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $305K reported
- Consistency: 41 of 41 current checks pass
- Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 9 filing years from 2014 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
- 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.
Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 53/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 31/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 28/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 27/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 42/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.