Living Branches

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
232125481
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Souderton, PA, USA
Phone
2153684438
Rating
60
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Senior Citizens' Housing/Retirement Communities

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$10,766,253
Expenses
$3,873,855
Assets
$20,900,067
Liabilities
$6,528,083

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

Leadership & pay

19 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • EDWARD D BRUBAKER (PRESIDENT & CEO)
  • MONIQUE COLE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR - SMH &)

Highest reported compensation

  • EDWARD D BRUBAKER (PRESIDENT & CEO): $430,070 total reported compensation
  • STEVEN D MYERS (CHIEF FINANCIAL & TECH OFF): $270,019 total reported compensation
  • MONIQUE COLE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR - SMH &): $227,462 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Together we empower older adults and families to lead lives of purpose and joy, guided by the mennonite tradition of care and service to others.

What it reported doing in 2024

Living branches provides management services for its related tax-exempt organizations that provide housing and health care for senior adults and housing for low-income families. Its management services include planning, establishing, operating, and maintaining these non-profit facilities. The organization contributes to residents' health, security, and happiness by offering housing, services, and programs designed to promote physical, emotional, mental, social, and spiritual health.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 85% 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 18
  • Transparency & Controls: 88
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 75
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 5.6%; rating input score 6
  • Program expense ratio: 15.8%; rating input score 16
  • Fundraising efficiency: $137.4 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 92%; rating input score 92; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 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: Pass
    • 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: 64%; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.4; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.31; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 44%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -16% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.3% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.7% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 5.6% of revenue deployed · 15.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $613K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $430K · 19 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $760K reported
  • Consistency: 37 of 38 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 10 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 8 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 6/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 16/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 45/100.