Living Community of St Joseph

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
412011661
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Minneapolis, MN, USA
Phone
7633472200
Rating
61
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$14,603,822
Expenses
$15,398,743
Assets
$21,076,652
Liabilities
$41,743,769

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JERRY CARLEY (CEO OF BHS)
  • AMY BYROM (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • JERRY CARLEY (CEO OF BHS): $1,087,851 total reported compensation
  • KEVIN RYMANOWSKI (CFO OF BHS): $600,393 total reported compensation
  • ANNELIESE PETERSON (SVP OF BENEDICTINE): $464,824 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

We are a catholic, faith-based organization entrusted with advancing the life-enhancing senior care ministry of the benedictine sisters of duluth, Minnesota. We witness to god's love by creating inclusive communities, supporting those we serve to live well and with purpose, with special concern for the underserved.

What it reported doing in 2024

Operation of benedictine living community - assisted living, a 81 unit assisted and independent living facility in st. Joseph, Missouri, which provides assisted living and catered living services to the elderly. The facility had an average occupancy of 61.0% and served 98 individuals during the fiscal year ended 6/30/25.

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. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 73
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 37
  • Sustainability: 26
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 84.2%; rating input score 84
  • Program expense ratio: 80.5%; rating input score 80
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 1st 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: 97.6%; rating input score 98; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: -5.4%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.37; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.98; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.9%; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.6% per year; rating input score 100; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.1% per year; rating input score 100; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2.8% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 84.2% of revenue deployed · 80.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 4 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $12.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1.1M · 10 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $1.4M reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 33 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 7 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 34 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 16/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 48/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 1/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 36/100.