Glacier Hills Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
381891500
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Livonia, MI, USA
Phone
7347696410
Rating
62
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Supportive Housing for Older Adults

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$26,340,867
Expenses
$27,821,395
Assets
$79,495,534
Liabilities
$80,747,226

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

24 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DANIEL DRAKE (DIRECTOR, PRESIDENT & CEO AS OF 7/24)
  • JACLYN HARRIS (DIRECTOR AND PRESIDENT THROUGH 12/24)
  • DAVID DEFRAIN (VICE PRESIDENT OF FINANCE)

Highest reported compensation

  • BENJAMIN CARTER (DIR; CHAIR AT 1/25; TRIN EVP & COO): $3,488,982 total reported compensation
  • DANIEL ISACKSEN (DIRECTOR AT 1/25; TRINITY EVP, CFO): $2,827,147 total reported compensation
  • DANIEL ROTH MD (DIR AT 1/25; TRIN CHIEF CLIN OFFCR): $2,494,986 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

We, trinity senior living communities and trinity health, serve together in the spirit of the gospel as a compassionate and transforming healing presence in our communities.glacier hills is a member of the trinity senior living communities and trinity health.

What it reported doing in 2024

Glacier hills in ann arbor is a senior living community located in ann arbor. A continuum of care options are offered. Since 1973 glacier hills has both pioneered and continually renewed its commitment to offer a premier senior lifestyle through transformative change. The community consists of independent living apartments and villas, assisted living apartments and skilled nursing beds, outpatient rehabilitation, and a wellness fitness center.glacier hills offers 188 independent living units, 78 assisted living units, 36 long term assisted living rooms and 44 beds in the care and rehabilitation center. Please visit our website for additional information: www.glacierhills.org

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 91% 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. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 67
  • Accountability: 32
  • Sustainability: 32
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 93%; rating input score 93
  • Program expense ratio: 88.1%; 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 3rd 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: -5.6%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.86; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.02; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9.3%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -3.8% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.5% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.3% per year; rating input score 100; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 93% of revenue deployed · 88.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 7 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $24.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $3.5M · 24 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $10.3M reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes executive pay and related organizations
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 308 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 15/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 6/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 23/100.