Genesys Home Health & Hospice

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
382177968
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2013
Forms available
Form 990 2013
Location
Grand Blanc, MI, USA
Phone
8106066618
Rating
64
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Home Health Care

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$8,051,035
Expenses
$6,804,989
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Elizabeth Aderholdt (Trustee, CEO/President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Elizabeth Aderholdt (Trustee, CEO/President): $1,036,385 total reported compensation
  • Christopher Palazzolo (GHS COO): $570,657 total reported compensation
  • Nancy Haywood (GHS CFO): $361,698 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

GHHH provides hospice care services. This care allows terminally ill patients and their families to remain together in the comfort of either the GHHH inpatient facility or a home setting. This team of physicians, nurses, nursing assistants, dietitians, social workers, clergy, and volunteers are dedicated to provide compassionate medical and emotional care.

What it reported doing in 2013

Hospice Services: Home Nursing - Home Nursing is dedicated to providing quality, comprehensive care and support to those faced with a life-limiting illness. The goal is to provide the best quality of life possible through expert pain control, symptom management, psychosocial, and spiritual support. During FY14, Home Nursing provided 32,272 days of service.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 90% 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 - 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 revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 65
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 72
  • Sustainability: 40
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 68.1%; rating input score 68
  • Program expense ratio: 81.9%; rating input score 82
  • 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: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 11th 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: 15.5%; rating input score 79; 79th 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: 8.6%; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -12.4% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -16.5% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 68.1% of revenue deployed · 81.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 12 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $5.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1M · 18 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2009 to 2013
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 16 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.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 26/100.