Clement Manor Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
391020547
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Greenfield, WI, USA
Phone
4143211800
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$14,068,170
Expenses
$14,022,659
Assets
$25,285,136
Liabilities
$20,187,470

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Dennis Ferger (President / CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • Dennis Ferger (President / CEO): $287,033 total reported compensation
  • Dinese Roberts (Registered Nurse): $174,499 total reported compensation
  • Teresa Gatto (COO): $154,932 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Clement Manor is a Catholic healthcare and eldercare organization sponsored by the Franciscan Sisters of Christian Charity. We are committed to providing a continuum of care and fostering the highest potential for the wellbeing of each individual on our campus and in our communities through deeply-rooted Franciscan values dedicated to enriching the life experience.

What it reported doing in 2024

Clement Manor, Inc. operates a high-quality skilled nursing facility offering nursing services, social services, leisure activities as well as spiritual services. A significant number of residents receive care where payments received from governmental agencies are at a shortfall of costs. Clement Manor also provides an array of services to support the elderly in their own apartments while assuring the maximum level on independence.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 98% of the money available for current operations came from other operating 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. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 76
  • Accountability: 80
  • Sustainability: 38
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 96.6%; rating input score 97
  • Program expense ratio: 96.9%; rating input score 97
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • 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: 72.7%; rating input score 73; 13th 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: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 0.3%; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.8; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.8; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.7%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -4.3% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -3% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0.3% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 96.6% of revenue deployed · 96.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 11 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $13.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $287K · 16 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $651K reported
  • Consistency: 40 of 41 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 7 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 7 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.

  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 34/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 58/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 14/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 31/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.