Manor Park
Legal name: Manor Park Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 751227882
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Aug 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Midland, TX, US
- Phone
- (432) 689-9898
- Rating
- 73
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Supportive Housing for Older Adults
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $46,751,035
- Expenses
- $31,179,913
- Assets
- $139,638,567
- Liabilities
- $76,622,175
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
27 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- STEPHEN NELSON (PRESIDENT & CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- STEPHEN NELSON (PRESIDENT & CEO): $297,800 total reported compensation
- TINA BALLARD (CFO): $219,068 total reported compensation
- LAUREN CANTU (COO): $217,494 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Manor Park provides a vibrant senior living community with a full continuum of care, enabling residents to enjoy an active, worry-free lifestyle.
What it reported doing in 2024
Manor park serves seniors over the age 0f 62 in six different levels of care, allowing residents to move in and live independently and as their needs for more care progress, allow residents to move to a higher level of care that fits their needs without having to leave their community of friends.manor park's healthcare provided skilled nursing to an average census of 10 residents per day; long term care to an average of 38 residents per day; long term memory care to an average of 16 residents per day. Including providing meals, activities and social interaction, spiritual support, services of a chaplain, availability of therapy services, licensed nurses on staff 24 hours a day, trained caring staff, and a home like environment.
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
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 program spending has declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 58
- Transparency & Controls: 76
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 75
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 45.5%; rating input score 46
- Program expense ratio: 69.7%; rating input score 70
- Fundraising efficiency: $117.05 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 14th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Pass
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 78%; rating input score 78; 16th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
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: 33.3%; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.48; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.55; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 5.1%; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -1.6% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 3.2% per year; rating input score 100; 27th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 3.8% per year; rating input score 100; 27th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 6 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 45.5% of revenue deployed · 69.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 18 of 18 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $21.7M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $298K · 27 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $8.7M reported
- Consistency: 34 of 35 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 9 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: 10 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 2 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 46/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 25/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 49/100.