Martins Run Home Partners

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
272268177
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Warminster, PA, USA
Phone
2153540565
Rating
62
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Personal Social Services

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,082,973
Expenses
$1,057,058
Assets
$1,013,077
Liabilities
$42,922

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DAN HOOD (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • JEFF PETTY (CHAIR): $1,004,112 total reported compensation
  • JOHN ODIKE (SECRETARY/TREASURER): $303,258 total reported compensation
  • DAN HOOD (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $246,238 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To make a compelling difference in the lives of our residents through providing excellence and innovation in aging services.

What it reported doing in 2025

Martins run home partners operates a non-profit home care agency using a holistic approach in home-based care, and offers services and a caring staff who understand senior residents with a variety of needs and conditions. The organization also provides supportive services to people who choose to age in place, so that they can continue to live independently as long as possible in either a single home or an apartment setting.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% 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: 87
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 32
  • Sustainability: 41
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 97.2%; rating input score 97
  • Program expense ratio: 99.6%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: 2.4%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.96; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.1%; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -2.1% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 19.2% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 97.2% of revenue deployed · 99.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 3 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1M · 3 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 16 of 16 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 8 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 — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 38/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 42/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 45/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 48/100.