Cullman Senior Housing Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
581906907
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Birmingham, AL, USA
Phone
2057155197
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Senior Citizens' Housing/Retirement Communities

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$545,076
Expenses
$585,105
Assets
$1,117,076
Liabilities
$1,904,053

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • TAYANA MILLWOOD (PRESIDENT)
  • SHELIA GENTRY (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • TAYANA MILLWOOD (PRESIDENT)
  • SHELIA GENTRY (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • AMANDA DEFOE (SECTETARY/TREASURER)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

Provide low income housing to elderly & disabled

What it reported doing in 2024

Cullman senior housing, inc. D/b/a nesmith park apartments (project) is a 53-unit apartment complex for the elderly located in cullman, Alabama. The project was originally financed and constructed under section 202 of the national housing act and was restructured under the 223(f) program. The project is regulated by the united states department of housing and urban development (hud) with respect to rental charges and operating methods. The project is also subject to section 8 housing assistance program (hap) agreement with hud, and a significant portion of the project's rental income is received from hud. Rent subsidy payments are subject to availablity of sufficient appropriations, as determined by hud.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 66% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 38
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 98.8%; rating input score 99
  • Program expense ratio: 92.1%; rating input score 92
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • 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: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -7.3%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.91; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.7; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.6% per year; rating input score 100; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.8% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -4.9% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 98.8% of revenue deployed · 92.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $539K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 20/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 3/100.