Marcus L Ward Home Dba
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 221574538
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2012
- Forms available
- Form 990 2012
- Location
- Maplewood, NJ, USA
- Phone
- 9737625050
- Rating confidence
- Limited
- Sector
- Supportive Housing for Older Adults
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $21,089,948
- Expenses
- $21,831,628
- Assets
- $75,354,534
- Liabilities
- $112,864,095
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2012. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
21 people listed
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2012. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Winchester gardens is committed to providing mature adults an active lifestyle that fosters dignity, privacy, individuality and independence in a caring environment. This is achieved through a highly skilled and concerned staff providing exceptional service with a focus on resident needs and desires.
What it reported doing in 2012
During 2012, 241 residents were provided a total of 76,053 days of residency in the 162 apartments and 40 villas under the terms of their ccrc contracts. The average age of the independent living residents as of 12/31/2012 was 88.1 years.during 2012, 123 residents were provided a total of 31,350 days of care in the health center. The average age of the health center residents as of 12/31/12 was 87.4 years.of the 123 residents in the health center, 69 received 11,562 days of care under the terms of the ccrc residency agreements and received discounts totaling approximately $600,000 when compared to rates charged to direct admit residents. Of the 54 direct admit residents (who received 19,788 days of care) winchester gardens provided approximately $400,000 of charitable assistance to 36 residents (for a total of 9,945 days) under the terms of a reduced rate direct admit contract in compliance with the terms of a court approved consent agreement modifying the will of marcus l. Ward, through participation in the nj assisted living medicaid waiver program, or direct financial assistance.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 95% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
The verdict
- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
- Transparency & Controls: 94
- Accountability: 91
- Sustainability: 36
- Growth: 20
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: Limited
- Program expense ratio: Limited
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 6 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Pass
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
- Written employment contract: Pass
- 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: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 31st 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: Fail
- 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: -3.5%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.45; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.5; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 6.2%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: -1.3% per year; rating input score 0; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 1% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
- Governance: 14 of 15 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $18.7M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $602K · 21 people listed · 6 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed
- Consistency: 34 of 34 current checks pass
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 2 filing years from 2010 to 2012
- Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
- 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 — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 16/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Document-retention policy not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 3/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 28/100.