Immanuel Campus of Care
Legal name: Immanuel Caring Ministries Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 860911226
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Aug 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Peoria, AZ, US
- Phone
- 623-977-8373
- Rating
- 65
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Supportive Housing for Older Adults
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $35,341,423
- Expenses
- $32,046,102
- Assets
- $39,152,143
- Liabilities
- $69,611,089
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
7 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- TERRY MCNELLIS (PRESIDENT)
- DR JOY SCHWERTLEY (VICE PRESIDENT)
- BRENDA PIERCE (PRIOR EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
- RAY TRAUTMAN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- RAY TRAUTMAN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $414,151 total reported compensation
- LARRY LITMAN (SECRETARY): $276,161 total reported compensation
- BRENDA PIERCE (PRIOR EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $208,257 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Immanuel Campus of Care is dedicated to providing the highest standards in care to guests, interactions with associates, and in efforts to raise the quality of life for all, committed to services with integrity for guests, their families, associates, and business associates.
What it reported doing in 2024
We offer safe, attractive retirement housing at moderate costs to elderly residents. The campus has health care resources readily available in the event of need or an emergency. Our assisted living unit affords older people a blend between independent living and nursing care through the assisted living program. Caregivers give residents the assistance they need in pursuing daily living activities. The nursing facility provides skilled nursing servies to patients of varied income levels. We assist patients in qualifying to receive federal, county and commercial/hmo funding. The skilled nursing is available to campus residents who often transfer back to their apartments upon recovery. Skilled nursing is also available to elderly patients from other locations within the community.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 98% 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 66
- Transparency & Controls: 60
- Accountability: 63
- Sustainability: 52
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 71.3%; rating input score 71
- Program expense ratio: 79.5%; rating input score 79
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 10th 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: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 60%; rating input score 60; 10th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 9.3%; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.22; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.78; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 2.9%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 4.9% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 6.3% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 4.3% per year; rating input score 100; 31st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 7 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 71.3% of revenue deployed · 79.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 3 of 5 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $25.5M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $414K · 7 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $642K reported
- Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes executive pay
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 2 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.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 43/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 2/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.