Elder Housing Llc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
201034873
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2014
Forms available
Form 990 2014
Location
Flint, MI, USA
Phone
9896523470
Rating
64
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Senior Citizens' Housing/Retirement Communities
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$8,357,814
Expenses
$8,238,542
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DAVID M GEHM (PRESIDENT & CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • DAVID M GEHM (PRESIDENT & CEO): $229,659 total reported compensation
  • MICHAEL LOGAN (SR. VP/COO SENIOR SERVICES): $156,186 total reported compensation
  • AMY STORMS (VP FINANCE AND CFO): $129,460 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Motivated by christ's love, we engage people as they experience and embrace their god-given potential.

What it reported doing in 2014

Elder housing (dba the manors) provides safe, secure housing to seniors with additional linkages to the community through outings and excursions, wellness programs, life enrichment activities, multiple spiritual support programs, and meaningful educational opportunities. This was provided to seniors on the manors campus with an average occupancy of 99 apartments for independent seniors, 138 apartments with some services provided to seniors, and 40 rooms for seniors who suffer memory loss. As of 12/31/14, the organization was dissolved and the net assets were transferred to lutheran homes of Michigan, inc.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 98% 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 - 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 few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 52
  • Transparency & Controls: 67
  • Accountability: 86
  • Sustainability: 30
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 57.6%; rating input score 58
  • Program expense ratio: 58.4%; rating input score 58
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: 1.4%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0.9%; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.9% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.4% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -24.1% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 57.6% of revenue deployed · 58.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $4.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $230K · 15 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $1.5M reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes executive pay and related organizations
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2009 to 2014
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 12 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 58/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 58/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 42/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.