Eskaton
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 942906307
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Carmichael, CA, USA
- Phone
- 9163340810
- Rating
- 58
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Senior Centers
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $-35,299
- Expenses
- $1,447,184
- Assets
- $1,856,906
- Liabilities
- $5,326,111
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
17 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- SHERI PEIFER (PRESIDENT & CEO)
- TODD S MURCH (FORMER CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- SHERI PEIFER (PRESIDENT & CEO): $825,245 total reported compensation
- TODD S MURCH (FORMER CEO): $750,000 total reported compensation
- MARK JENKINS (SVP & CFO): $494,305 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 primary mission is to enhance the lives of older adults through innovative wellness, housing and social services.
What it reported doing in 2024
Live well at home (lwh): lwh provides nonmedical home care visits to older adults who require assistance with activities of daily living in order to remain independent in their homes. Lwh operating statistics - hours billed: 125,428. Active clients at the end of the year: 64. Please visit www.eskaton.org for the eskaton annual report.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 96% 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
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 54
- Transparency & Controls: 67
- Accountability: 81
- Sustainability: 11
- Growth: 0
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 71.5%; rating input score 72
- Program expense ratio: 43.4%; rating input score 43
- 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: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 27th 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: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -4,199.8%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.28; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 2.87; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 18.5%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -9.6% per year; rating input score 0; 30th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -6.7% per year; rating input score 0; 39th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -4.5% per year; rating input score 0; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 71.5% of revenue deployed · 43.4% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 10 of 11 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $629K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $825K · 17 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay and related organizations
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- Related organizations: 11 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 43/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 9 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 28/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 2/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 13/100.