Chestnut Health and Rehabilitation Group Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
450699932
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2016, Form 990-N 2013
Location
West Palm Beach, FL, USA
Phone
2153466454
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Rehabilitative Medical Services

Reported finances

Revenue
$39,467,972
Expenses
$47,623,869
Assets
$45,074,522
Liabilities
$54,864,882

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • JACQUELINE CIERVO (REGISTERED NURSE): $129,461 total reported compensation
  • SALOMON KLAROU (LPN): $111,035 total reported compensation
  • ALLEN BRECHT (DIRECTOR): $8,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The entity is organized and operated for the provision of short and long-term stays offering post acute and rehabilitation services. The organization provides these services by providing room and board, nursing services, healthcare, therapy, resident services and security at an afforable cost. The organization strives to provide open, diverse, and caring environments for residents, family members and staff.

What it reported doing in 2016

The organization operates skilled nursing facilities located in Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Hampshire, and Rhode Island, with a capacity of 1405 beds, dedicated and committed to providing rehabilitation and short and long term nursing and medical care of patients and residents. The organization provides numerous activities and programs incorporating and promoting family activities and involvement with residents and staff these activities promote a normalized environment.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 85
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 25
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 88.1%; rating input score 88
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -20.7%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.95; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.22; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0.6%; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.9% per year; rating input score 0; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -7.8% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 23.3% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 88.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $42M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $129K · 7 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $6M reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2014 to 2016
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 4/100.
  • 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 — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 43/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 4/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.