Ashtabula Regional Home Health Services

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
341143158
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2013
Forms available
Form 990 2013
Location
Ashtabula, OH, USA
Phone
4409924663
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Hospital, General

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$5,300,153
Expenses
$5,495,627
Assets
$1,673,688
Liabilities
$684,084

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

21 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MICHAEL HABOWSKI (PRESIDENT/CEO)
  • KERRY GERKEN (CEO, ASHTABULA REGIONAL HOME HEALTH)

Highest reported compensation

  • SUK K CHOI MD (BOARD MEMBER/PHYSICIAN REP): $720,999 total reported compensation
  • ROBERT DLWGOSH MD (BOARD MEMBER/PHYSICIAN REP): $422,248 total reported compensation
  • JUDE CAUWENBERGH DO (BOARD MEMBER/PHYSICIAN REP): $300,471 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Ashtabula regional home health services is a private, not-for-profit, community oriented home care agency that provides the best possible home care through all phases of life for those in need of home care. We are committed to preserving human rights and dignity of those who receive our care and those who provide it.

What it reported doing in 2013

Senior levy direct program and alzheimer's respite program - provides home health aide/homemaker services and supervisory nursing visists to chronically ill patients. Based on income requirements and community needs. Total sr levy direct visits = 2,311total alzheimer's respite program visits = 3,074

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 99% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 73
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 26
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 83.4%; rating input score 83
  • Program expense ratio: 80.4%; rating input score 80
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 55.6%; rating input score 56; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 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: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -3.7%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.3; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.41; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.2%; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 12.4% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.5% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 83.4% of revenue deployed · 80.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 18 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $4.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $721K · 21 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 4 contractors listed · $627K reported
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2012 to 2013
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 3 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Review — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 56/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 20/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 14/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 34/100.