Covenant Care

Legal name: Covenant Health & Community Services Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
465132177
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Pensacola, FL, US
Phone
1-855-CARE-365
Rating
55
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Nonmonetary Support N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$90,924,868
Expenses
$15,762,676
Assets
$97,059,693
Liabilities
$53,531,066

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

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JEFF MISLEVY (PRESIDENT/CEO)
  • RODNEY GUTTMANN (PAST CHAIR/ INTERIM CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • JEFF MISLEVY (PRESIDENT/CEO): $4,545,048 total reported compensation
  • ROLAND CLENEAY (CFO): $1,402,345 total reported compensation
  • BRIAN TIEMAN (CPO): $1,134,754 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Covenant Care provides compassionate, faith-based home health, hospice, and palliative care to patients and families in Florida and Alabama.

What it reported doing in 2024

Covenant health and community services, inc. Was formed to act as theparent corporation of the four corporations described in section501(c)(3) of the code, covenant hospice, inc., covenant hospicefoundation, inc., alzheimers family services, inc., and covenant athome, inc. As well as the two disregarded entites covenant palliativecare services, llc, and covenant home health holdings, llc. Covenanthome health holdings, llc is the single member of covenant home healthcare, llc, covenant home health care 3, llc, covenant home health care4, llc, covenant home health care 5, llc, covenant home health care 6, llc, covenant home health care 7, llc, covenant home health care 8, llc, covenant home health care 9, llc, covenant home health care 10, llc and covenant home health care 11, llc.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 75% 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

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 10
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 76
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 11.4%; rating input score 11
  • Program expense ratio: 12.1%; rating input score 12
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 90%; rating input score 90; 38th 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: 82.7%; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 6.16; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.55; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 53%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.8% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 25.6% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 26.2% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 2 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 11.4% of revenue deployed · 12.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 10 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $4.5M · 15 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 4 contractors listed · $1.2M reported
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 16 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.

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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 11/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 12/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 32/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.