Lifestream Complete Senior Living at Thunderbird Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
860739097
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2023
Forms available
Form 990 2023
Location
Youngtown, AZ, USA
Phone
7194875386
Rating
65
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Supportive Housing for Older Adults

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,383,229
Expenses
$3,146,109
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DANA RASIC (BOARD CHAIR / CEO)
  • BRIAN LARENA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (END 8/23))

Highest reported compensation

  • DANA RASIC (BOARD CHAIR / CEO): $380,291 total reported compensation
  • NATHAN MERRILL (TREASURER / CFO): $269,393 total reported compensation
  • RICK SUMMERS (BOARD MEMBER / COO): $254,542 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Our mission is to serve seniors by enriching their physical, emotional and spiritual health in a close-knit community.

What it reported doing in 2023

Lifestream at thunderbird operates a 170-apartment retirement community in glendale, Arizona. The campus includes 170 apartments of independent living. Services include assistance with activities of daily living, medication management, well-being checks, transportation, activities programs, housekeeping and laundry, meals in a dining room, spiritual care via a chaplain, and other services to our residents.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% 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 a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 87
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 38
  • Sustainability: 11
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 94.8%; rating input score 95
  • 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: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 10%; rating input score 10; 6th 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: -32%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.2%; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.7% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.4% per year; rating input score 100; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -9.2% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 94.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 1 of 10 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $380K · 11 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2023
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 3 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 10/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 4/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.