Holly Ridge Manor Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
411649721
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2016, Form 990-EZ 2009
Location
Starbuck, MN, USA
Phone
3202394775
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Supportive Housing for Older Adults

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$642,974
Expenses
$562,246
Assets
$738,800
Liabilities
$68,224

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • CHRISTOPHER KNOLL (ADMINISTRATOR): $100,424 total reported compensation
  • BRIAN ENGLER (DIRECTOR OF FINANCE): $71,516 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

A community of services, grounded in faith, providing person centered care that encourages all people to reach their highest potential.

What it reported doing in 2016

Holly ridge manor is a 20-unit housing facility offering both one and two bedroom apartments to the community members it serves. Holly ridge manor provides both independent housing and assisted living housing and services for seniors and those not capable of living independently of others in a safe and secure setting. Holly ridge manor offers daily exercise programs as well as the assistance with activities of daily living. Holly ridge manor also offers up to three meals daily, housekeeping services and skilled nursing services specific to each clients' needs. Holly ridge manor is governed by a ten person independent board made up of one at-large community leader and nine area church members. The board has a history of commitment to acting with the highest integrity and has been proactively evaluating opportunities to ensure the organization continues to operate at its maximum potential for the benefit of the clients we serve.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 97% 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and some filed totals do not add up.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 79
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 64
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 84%; rating input score 84
  • Program expense ratio: 96.1%; rating input score 96
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 12.6%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.31; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.09; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.8%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 10.9% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.6% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.2% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 84% of revenue deployed · 96.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $540K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $100K · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 27 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2010 to 2016
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 3 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 55/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 51/100.