Arms Wide Open Community Development Corporation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
582663375
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Scottdale, GA, USA
Phone
4045089141
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$212,912
Expenses
$153,450
Assets
$342,602
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Kenneth Morris (Executive Director)
  • Lisa Newman (President)
  • Lewis Roberts (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Kenneth Morris (Executive Director): $24,000 total reported compensation
  • Lisa Newman (President): $3,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of Arms Wide Open Community Development Corporation is to operate a durable medical equipment loan program whereby used home health equipment such as wheelchairs, bedside commodores, walkers, and other walking aides are recycled and placed with the frail elderly and disabled for the purpose of helping them to remain at home and avoid nursing home placement.

What it reported doing in 2025

Arms Wide Open Community Development Corporation provides case manamement services for people with traumatic brain injury and spinal cord injury. Case management involves coordinating the care of persons who are suffering with serious illness or sickness for the purpose of help them to access needed resources or services. Arms Wide Open Lifecare Program helped individuals with chronic illnesses to meet such needs as housing, social security enrollment, Veteran's benefit enrollment food stamps enrollment, nursing home or institutional placement. Case management services were provided to consumers who reside in a home or community setting. The purpose of this program is to help consumers to remain at home for as long as possible. This program is designed to assist the family members and other informal caregivers in their effort to perform their role and the primary caregiver of the disabled family member.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 66% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 58% for direct work, and 42% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - 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 revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 73
  • Transparency & Controls: 77
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 67
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 72.1%; rating input score 72
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 75%; rating input score 75; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 27.9%; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.23; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 17.6%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -19% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -16.7% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.4% per year; rating input score 100; 32nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 72.1% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $153K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $24K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 38 of 41 current checks pass · 3 findings to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2020 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule M noncash within contributions did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 20/100.