Manchester Supportive Housing Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
251662399
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Oakmont, PA, USA
Phone
4128266030
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$294,857
Expenses
$275,945
Assets
$520,039
Liabilities
$335,992

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • James B Pieffer (Director, President and Se)

Highest reported compensation

  • James B Pieffer (Director, President and Se): $513,855 total reported compensation
  • Todd Boslau (Director and Treasurer): $342,956 total reported compensation
  • Celeste Golonski (Director and Secretary): $282,251 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

HUD subsidized affordable housing with supportive services for low income seniors who meet the income eligibility requirements of the HUD 202 Section 8 program. SeniorCare Network manages this community and provides or assists in the provision of services to meet individual resident needs. Typically, even though this community is a supportive housing facility, between 50-70% of our residents ae considered frail or at risk. To address these issues and the needs of those residing in this community, we employ a Service Coordinator to work with each resident as appropriate. The Service Coordinator assesses the needs of each resident and makes referrals to appropriate resources, such as families, senior centers, churches and other community groups. SeniorCare Network is an affiliate of Presbyterian SeniorCare, a not-for-profit, charitable organization established on January 25, 1928 which provides facilities, services and programs for enhancing the quality of life of older adults.

What it reported doing in 2025

Community provides affordable supportive housing for persons with physical disabilities, including HIV/AIDS who meet the income eligibility requirements of the HUD Section 811 program. 100% of the 15-20 residents served daily meet these guidelines.The three most common areas where residents need assistance are transportation, housekeeping, and meals. Other services include social service coordination and other supportive and preventative programs to assist residents to age with choice, such as medication management, bathing, and IDL support. In addition, there is also a focus on prevention through education, health screenings, and wellness and activity programs to support the health of the community.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 76% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 78
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 53
  • Sustainability: 42
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 85%; rating input score 85
  • Program expense ratio: 90.8%; rating input score 91
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 20%; rating input score 20; 17th 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: 6.4%; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.88; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.65; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 43.1%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.8% per year; rating input score 100; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.4% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2.9% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 85% of revenue deployed · 90.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 1 of 5 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $251K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $514K · 5 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 44 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 20/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 50/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 58/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 7/100.