Benedictine

Legal name: Cerenity Senior Care

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
363517696
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Minneapolis, MN, US
Phone
(763) 347-2200
Rating
58
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Nursing Services (General)

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$40,305,545
Expenses
$38,535,382
Assets
$50,371,109
Liabilities
$38,096,284

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JERRY CARLEY (CEO OF BHS)
  • ARIEL MILLER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • JENNIFER BRUHN (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • JERRY CARLEY (CEO OF BHS): $1,087,851 total reported compensation
  • KEVIN RYMANOWSKI (CFO & TREASURER): $600,393 total reported compensation
  • JENNIFER BRUHN (PRESIDENT): $285,637 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Benedictine is a Catholic, faith-based organization entrusted with advancing the life-enhancing senior care ministry of the Benedictine Sisters of Duluth, Minnesota. We witness to God’s love by creating inclusive communities, supporting those we serve to live well and with purpose, with special concern for the underserved.

What it reported doing in 2024

Operations of disregarded entity - cerenity - marian of st. Paul, llc (32-0542938) operates cerenity care center - marian of st. Paul, a 90-bed skilled nursing facility and a 30-unit memory care facility in st. Paul, Minnesota. The skilled nursing facility had 84.4% occupancy and served 559 individuals and the memory care facility had 78.8% occupancy and served 196 individuals during the fiscal year ending 6/30/2025.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 92% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 99% 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

MIXED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 71
  • Transparency & Controls: 51
  • Accountability: 56
  • Sustainability: 48
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 77.9%; rating input score 78
  • Program expense ratio: 82.1%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 1st 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: 24.1%; rating input score 24; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 33.3%; rating input score 33; 7th 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: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 4.4%; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.31; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.76; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.6%; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.4% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.3% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 3 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 77.9% of revenue deployed · 82.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 1 of 3 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $31.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1.1M · 12 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $4.7M reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 33 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
  • 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.
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 33/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 24/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 52/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 46/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 15/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.