Homewood Living Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
521892689
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Williamsport, MD, USA
Phone
3015821626
Rating
64
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Supportive Housing for Older Adults

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$10,307,779
Expenses
$1,577,327
Assets
$25,110,036
Liabilities
$1,527,532

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • THAD D ROTHROCK (PARENT PRESI): $1,127,514 total reported compensation
  • RICHARD P MILLER (VP OPERATION): $670,400 total reported compensation
  • WENDY S CRAMPTON (TREASURER/VP): $521,887 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The homewood group of companies primarily provides a continuum of care for elderly persons in beautiful retirement communities and nursing homes in five locations: frederick, Maryland; williamsport, Maryland; hanover, Pennsylvania; martinsburg, Pennsylvania; and everett, Pennsylvania. These facilities contain a total of 1,149 independent living cottages and apartments, 288 assisted living units, and 451 nursing home beds. The nursing home beds are provided for skilled and special memory care.

What it reported doing in 2024

Resident care - payments enable the homewood group to (a) provide services to residents who are unable to pay for their services, (b) maximize occupancy which keeps daily fees at a reasonable level. The homewood living foundation raises funds for a variety of important initiatives, including: benevolent care for homewood residents who may need special assistance the homewood benevolent endowment fund, established in 1972, receives gifts for benevolent care. These funds are distributed among the retirement communities to assist with the financial needs of residents who meet established qualification criteria. The benevolent funds are raised annually through: 1. Benevolent and memorial gifts 2. A mother's day appeal in cooperation with united church of christ churches 3. An annual appeal at year-end 4. Site projects, such as the "garden of life- and "tree of love" during the holidays

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 82% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 26
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 83
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 12.6%; rating input score 13
  • Program expense ratio: 42.2%; rating input score 42
  • Fundraising efficiency: $10.75 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 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: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 84.7%; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 15.92; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 40.8%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.9% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.7% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -3.1% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 12.6% of revenue deployed · 42.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 6 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $665K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1.1M · 9 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 34 of 34 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 7 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 11 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 13/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 42/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 40/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.