Eskaton Village Grass Valley

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
943358174
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Carmichael, CA, USA
Phone
9163340810
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Senior Citizens' Housing/Retirement Communities

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$11,889,205
Expenses
$18,011,211
Assets
$6,073,531
Liabilities
$23,482,079

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

Independent living apartments with services and assisted living apartments. All residents have an emergency response system with 24-hour staffing, shuttle service, access to the fitness center, an in-house physician, services of a recreation coordinator and advice nurse, and a full range of recreational activities that may include gardening, arts & craft projects, current events discussions, and exercise. Eskaton village grass valley operating statistics - resident days: 48,766. Please visit www.eskaton.org for the eskaton annual report.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 55% for direct work, and 45% for 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 85
  • Transparency & Controls: 68
  • Accountability: 81
  • Sustainability: 13
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 87.5%; rating input score 88
  • 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Scored; rating input score 0

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 23rd 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: -51.5%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.34; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 3.87; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.4%; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.1% per year; rating input score 100; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.2% per year; rating input score 100; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -3.6% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 87.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 11 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $15.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $825K · 17 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 4 contractors listed · $1.1M reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 9/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 1/100.