Homecare of Mid-Missouri

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237405893
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2018
Forms available
Form 990 2018
Location
Moberly, MO, USA
Phone
6602631517
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Home Health Care

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,842,639
Expenses
$2,891,121
Assets
$496,787
Liabilities
$439,911

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DIANE NOAH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • DIANE NOAH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $115,148 total reported compensation
  • SCOTT ANDREWS (FINANCIAL DIRECTOR): $100,017 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Homecare of mid-Missouri is passionately committed to providing the best individualized health care services for our clients, support for their families, and improving the health of the community. See schedule o for additional information.

What it reported doing in 2018

In-home care, also called home and community base care, typically refers to non-medical services that assist individuals with activities of daily living. In-home care is an increasingly popular choice for care because it enables individuals to remain in their own environments, and can also be a lifesaver for caregivers. Homecare of mid-Missouri served 441 clients during 2018 in the in-home services program. See schedule o for additional information.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% 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. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 69
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 19
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 78%; rating input score 78
  • Program expense ratio: 76.7%; rating input score 77
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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; 64th 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: -1.7%; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.17; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.89; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.4%; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -2% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -4.1% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -7.9% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 78% of revenue deployed · 76.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $2.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $115K · 9 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $267K reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2010 to 2018
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 26/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 6/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 10/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 34/100.