Eben Ezer
Legal name: Eben Ezer Lutheran Care Center Foundation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 742480396
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Brush, CO, USA
- Phone
- 970.842.2861; 800.410.4170
- Rating
- 83
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Single Organization Support
- Affiliation
- Christianity
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $2,027,661
- Expenses
- $2,026,073
- Assets
- $14,281,432
- Liabilities
- $221,590
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
11 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- SHELLY GRIFFITH (CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- SHELLY GRIFFITH (CEO): $240,967 total reported compensation
- LESLIE MASON (CFO): $176,473 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Founded in faith, our mission is to empower our team and those we serve to grow together as a community that celebrates aging. Eben Ezer is a faith-based, not for profit, mission-driven organization that focuses on senior living care and services. On our Brush campus, we provide independent housing apartments, assisted living, memory care, and skilled nursing care and services. We also provide electronic devices supporting individuals living in their homes, throughout Northeast Colorado. Additionally, there are four other assisted living communities under the Eben Ezer umbrella. These communities are all in northeast Colorado, located in Ft. Morgan, Sterling, and Yuma. As our mission states, we are founded in faith, our mission is to empower our team and those we serve to grow together as a community that celebrates.
What it reported doing in 2024
To provide financial assistance to eben ezer lutheran care center. The care center provided skilled nursing care, respite care, assisted living, independent living, and lifeline emergency response services to the elderly and persons with special needs. The care center also provides electronic monitoring services to individuals in their home.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 61% 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.
- 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. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 88
- Transparency & Controls: 71
- Accountability: 91
- Sustainability: 60
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 97.5%; rating input score 98
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd 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: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 0.1%; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 7.05; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 2.9%; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 8.7% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 6.3% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 11.7% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 1 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 97.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $241K · 11 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 18 of 18 current checks pass
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- 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.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 34/100.