Jeffco Health Services Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 251505478
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2021
- Location
- Brookville, PA, USA
- Phone
- 8148498026
- Rating
- 68
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Nursing, Convalescent Facilities
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $10,644,070
- Expenses
- $12,908,929
- Assets
- $26,229,434
- Liabilities
- $13,709,561
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
14 people listed
Highest reported compensation
- Mark Norman (DIRECTOR & COO PHH): $715,216 total reported compensation
- Gregory Bauer (DIRECTOR & PHYSICIAN): $389,639 total reported compensation
- Julianne Peer (SECRETARY & PRES PH ELK): $330,632 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Penn highlands jefferson manor is committed to being the most caring and progressive provider of extended care in the area by promoting the highest standard of care and quality of life for our residents.
What it reported doing in 2024
Penn highlands jefferson manor independent living is a five (5) unit facility, designed for independent individuals who no longer want the responsibility of owning a home. Housekeeping and maintenance services are provided. It has a private entrance and parking area. Individuals living here are welcome to participate in activities and other events with the skilled nursing and personal care residents. Combined, we provide a complete continuum of care and a such, we are licensed to be a continuing care retirement community (ccrc) effective february 2009.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Other-operating. 100% of the money available for current operations came from other operating 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 most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 78
- Transparency & Controls: 59
- Accountability: 85
- Sustainability: 31
- Growth: 20
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 94.1%; rating input score 94
- Program expense ratio: 77.6%; rating input score 78
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 8th 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: 75%; rating input score 75; 14th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Limited
- 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: -21.3%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.03; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.52; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 3.2%; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -0.7% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -1.3% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 3.1% per year; rating input score 100; 24th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 94.1% of revenue deployed · 77.6% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 9 of 12 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $10M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $715K · 14 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $2M reported
- Consistency: 25 of 26 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
- Filing history: 13 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 30 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.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 4/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 27/100.