Convalescent Aid Society

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
951782304
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Pasadena, CA, USA
Phone
6267931696
Rating
87
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Nursing, Convalescent Facilities

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,113,789
Expenses
$1,835,354
Assets
$10,632,700
Liabilities
$1,043,868

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

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOHN CALDERONE PHD (PRESIDENT)
  • MARK WATERSON (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • MARK WATERSON (CEO): $168,696 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To provide the loan of durable medical equipment, free of charge with no time constraints, to the residents of the san gabriel valley, glendale, and burbank, California.

What it reported doing in 2024

Loans of durable medical equipment to those in need. Wheelchairs, walkers, hospital beds, as well as equipment needed by handicapped individuals. A list of equipment available is shown under the "equipment" caption on the cas website. All services are provided at no cost to the recipient. Through the year ending 6/30/2025, with the help of 20 volunteers, cas has approximately 30,000 pieces of durable medical equipment on loan and is serving over 10,000 clients in the san garbiel and san fernando valleys.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 86% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 97% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration and some filed totals do not add up.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 78
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 68
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 93.4%; rating input score 93
  • Program expense ratio: 86.5%; rating input score 86
  • Fundraising efficiency: $25.88 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 24th 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: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 84.1%; rating input score 84; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 13.2%; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.79; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.1; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9.2%; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.5% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.6% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.7% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 93.4% of revenue deployed · 86.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 17 of 17 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $169K · 18 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 38 of 39 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 33/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 59/100.