Eastmont Foundation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 911767080
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Lincoln, NE, USA
- Phone
- 4024867515
- Rating
- 74
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Public Foundations
- Affiliation
- Christianity
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $608,045
- Expenses
- $774,822
- Assets
- $4,988,133
- Liabilities
- $78,283
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
13 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- ANDREW FISHER MHA NHA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
- GREG SULLIVAN (PRESIDENT & DIRECTOR)
- JEFF AHL (VICE PRESIDENT & PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- ANDREW FISHER MHA NHA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $185,750 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Eastmont foundation seeks, receives, and administers philanthropic support for the needs of christian retirement homes (dba: eastmont towers community) and the benevolent programs undertaken by eastmont towers community's residents and staff.
What it reported doing in 2024
To raise money for the use of christian retirement homes (dba: eastmont towers community), a not-for-profit 501(c)(3) corporation, for the programs described below:1. Benevolent life care - provide benevolent care for life care residents who have exhausted their financial resources.2. Benevolent hospice care - provide benevolent hospice care for community members at the monarch, a hospice care facility within the eastmont community.3. Operational grants - provide operational grants for specific improvements that enhance the quality of life of eastmont residents.4. Eastmont cares - support eastmont employees who personify the eastmont way through tuition reimbursement and emergency assistance.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 69% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 81
- Transparency & Controls: 61
- Accountability: 90
- Sustainability: 44
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 74.7%; rating input score 75
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Missing
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 60.1%; rating input score 60; 30th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 24th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- 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: -27.4%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 6.44; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 3.3%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 0.7% per year; rating input score 100; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -2.9% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 1.7% per year; rating input score 100; 24th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 74.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 11 of 12 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $579K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $186K · 13 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- Related organizations: 20 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 7/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: CEO compensation review process not reported.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.