EBC Housing III

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
204525971
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2007
Location
Cleveland, OH, USA
Phone
2163616141
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Senior Citizens' Housing/Retirement Communities

Reported finances

Revenue
$378,221
Expenses
$610,335
Assets
$2,015,212
Liabilities
$4,882,100

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Bridgette Rodgers (President/CEO)
  • Jean Allen-Jenkins (2nd Vice President)
  • Teena Mitchell (President, Aux I)
  • Margaret Mitchell (President, Aux III)
  • Gwendolyn James (President, Aux II)

Highest reported compensation

  • Bridgette Rodgers (President/CEO): $51,582 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The mission of Eliza Bryant Village is to provide a dignified and fulfilling quality of life for the needful elderly in our community through facilities, programs, services designed to enhance their health and well-being. EBC Housing III accomplishes this by providing high quality senior housing for low income seniors subsidized by EBC and through the HUD 202 Program. Its tenants have access to a full array of outpatient programs and services offered throughout the campus.

What it reported doing in 2024

EBC Housing III Corp is a nonprofit 501(c)(3) philanthropic organization which provides subsidized senior housing (45 unit independent living facilities) through the HUD Section 202 Program for low income elderly. The housing is located on the campus of the Eliza Bryant Village, which is a comprehensive provider of geriatric services including adult day care, transportation, well senior, community services, senior housing, and skilled nursing care.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% 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

SUPPORTED - 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: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 85
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 23
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 71.6%; rating input score 72
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 84.6%; rating input score 85; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -61.4%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.3; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 2.42; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: Limited

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.3% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.5% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -4.9% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 71.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $437K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $52K · 14 people listed
  • Consistency: 19 of 21 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 3 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 4/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 2/100.