Malachi House Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
341598707
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Cleveland, OH, USA
Phone
2166218831
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,449,591
Expenses
$2,510,453
Assets
$21,574,876
Liabilities
$406

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

Leadership & pay

20 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JUDY GHAZOUL HILOW (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • JUDY GHAZOUL HILOW (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $175,559 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Malachi house, created out of a christian sense of ministry, serves persons who are terminally ill, without regard to gender, race, religion or national origin and without cost to the resident of family. This home ministers to individuals who need an available caregiver, who have limited or no financial resources and are in need of special home care in the final stages of life. Our trained staff and volunteers provide spiritual, emotional, and physical support with the assistance of a hospice team.

What it reported doing in 2024

Malachi house served 63 residents during the fiscal year.funding provided by contributions from the general public allowed malachi house to accept all qualified recipients who applied for assistance.

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 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 82
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 75.5%; rating input score 75
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.79 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 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: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 27.2%; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 8.59; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.6% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.7% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.8% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 75.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 19 of 19 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $176K · 20 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 12/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 42/100.