Ingleside at Home Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
474127765
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2017, Form 990-N 2016
Location
Rockville, MD, USA
Phone
3014072030
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Home Health Care

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,949,448
Expenses
$1,952,092
Assets
$1,061,976
Liabilities
$2,045,478

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

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LYNN O'CONNOR (PRESIDENT/CEO)
  • DOUGLAS MYERS (PRESIDENT/CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • LYNN O'CONNOR (PRESIDENT/CEO): $674,664 total reported compensation
  • JAMES SPENCER (CFO & CHIEF GROWTH OFFICER): $614,084 total reported compensation
  • DOUGLAS MYERS (PRESIDENT/CEO): $448,855 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Ingleside at home fosters our clients' ability to thrive and be independent by providing high quality, trusted, and customized services in the comfort of their own homes.

What it reported doing in 2024

Ingleside at home is a member of the ingleside system, which also includes the highly respected continuing care retirement communities of ingleside at rock creek, westminster at lake ridge and ingleside at king farm, as well as the westminster ingleside foundation.ingleside at home began in 2013 as a way to support the residents of westminster at lake ridge through home care services. The extension of home and community-based services to the district of columbia and in-home care services to northern Virginia and suburban Maryland grew out of our mission to share our expertise in senior care with the greater community.when you engage a caregiver from ingleside at home, you can be sure that you are receiving the highest quality services, based on experience, ongoing training and commitment to the well-being of each client. Our company's financial security and not-for-profit status provide an additional measure of trust and peace of mind.

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 - Most voting board members are independent 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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 57
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 30
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 67%; rating input score 67
  • Program expense ratio: 58%; rating input score 58
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: -0.1%; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.54; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.93; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.6%; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 12.8% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 23.1% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 27.9% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 67% of revenue deployed · 58% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $675K · 17 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $304K reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2018 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 6 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 58/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 35/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 25/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 2/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 48/100.