Evangelical Services for the Aging Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
231971878
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Warminster, PA, USA
Phone
2153540565
Rating
58
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Nursing, Convalescent Facilities
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$362,255
Expenses
$77,326
Assets
$5,379,460
Liabilities
$36,611

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • JEFF PETTY (BOARD MEMBER): $1,004,112 total reported compensation
  • JOHN ODIKE (BOARD MEMBER): $303,258 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To make a compelling difference in the lives of our residents through providing excellence and innovation in aging services.

What it reported doing in 2025

The organization provides funding for related 509(a)(2) public charities: wesley enhanced living pennypack park, wesley enhanced living upper moreland, wesley enhanced living doylestown, wesley enhanced living burholme, wesley enhanced living at stapeley, wesley enhanced living main line, and evangelical services for the aging. The organization provides benevolent care and resident services for the aging to promote general health, welfare and security of the senior residents, and to plan for, and develop, new programs and services to meet the social, health and personal needs of senior citizens.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 83% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most filed governance safeguards are in place. 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: 37
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 77
  • Sustainability: 80
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 21.1%; rating input score 21
  • Program expense ratio: 75.1%; rating input score 75
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 60%; rating input score 60; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Limited
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 78.7%; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 69.57; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 59.2%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -9.4% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.3% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.7% per year; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 21.1% of revenue deployed · 75.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 5 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $58K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1M · 5 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 20 of 20 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 21/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 2/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 42/100.