Ladies Home of Oswego Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 150543641
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2017
- Forms available
- Form 990 2017
- Location
- Oswego, NY, USA
- Phone
- 3153436951
- Rating
- 76
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Supportive Housing for Older Adults
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $267,069
- Expenses
- $470,712
- Assets
- $347,278
- Liabilities
- $15,581
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
6 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- LINDA THOMAS CASTOR (PRESIDENT/VI)
People named in this filing
- CAROL LIVESEY (DIRECTOR)
- GLORIA JASKULA (DIRECTOR)
- ROBERT BRANSHAW (DIRECTOR)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The mission of the ladies home of oswego is to help its residents gain and maintain optimal wellness. The primary objectives of the corporation are as follows: (a) to provide a facility for mature adults to comfortably reside in, operated pursuant to the applicable regulations of the New York state department of health. (b) to provide staff to maintain and oversee the operation of the home. (c) to otherwise coordinate and participate in programs designed to assist the residents of the home, and adult residents of the community in general, and to acomplish those goals, to establish appropriate funding programs.
What it reported doing in 2017
Home and health care for elderly women including full time employees to care for them. 10 women received full time health care during the fiscal year ending september 30, 2018.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 99% 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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 84
- Transparency & Controls: 90
- Accountability: 70
- Sustainability: 25
- Growth: 0
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 84.2%; rating input score 84
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- 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: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -76.3%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.74; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -0.2% per year; rating input score 0; 38th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -5.6% per year; rating input score 0; 16th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -8.8% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 84.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $396K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
- Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 8 filing years from 2009 to 2017
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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.
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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 3/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 35/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 41/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.