Simpson Senior Services

Legal name: Jenner's Pond Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
231548106
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Bala Cynwyd, PA, USA
Phone
6106600112
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Hospital, General

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$27,108,671
Expenses
$28,646,412
Assets
$75,303,952
Liabilities
$127,127,055

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

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CAROL MCKINLEY (PRESIDENT/CEO)
  • JAMES CLANCY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • CAROL MCKINLEY (PRESIDENT/CEO): $431,417 total reported compensation
  • KENNETH FRANIAK (CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $369,783 total reported compensation
  • JAMES CLANCY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $195,762 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Not explicitly stated on the site for Jenner's Pond; the Simpson organization emphasizes a not-for-profit commitment to resident well-being.

What it reported doing in 2024

Jenner's pond operates a continuing care retirement community that provides housing, healthcare, and other related services to residents through the operation of 162 residential cottages, 116 apartments, 59 assisted living suites, of which 12 suites have been designated for dementia care, and 36 skilled nursing beds. The primary service area includes chester county and surrounding communities.benevolent care provided for the year 2024 benefited residents totaling $24,400.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 97% 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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 77
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 85
  • Sustainability: 36
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 88.4%; rating input score 88
  • Program expense ratio: 83.2%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 90%; rating input score 90; 22nd 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: -5.7%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.63; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.69; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.4%; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.2% per year; rating input score 100; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.5% per year; rating input score 100; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.6% per year; rating input score 100; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 2 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 88.4% of revenue deployed · 83.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 10 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $23.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $431K · 17 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $6.6M reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 14 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.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 15/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 2/100.