Mayflower Gardens Health Facilities Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 953926600
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Long Beach, CA, USA
- Phone
- 5622575100
- Rating
- 48
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Single Organization Support
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $16,057,419
- Expenses
- $14,360
- Assets
- $723,486
- Liabilities
- $44,576
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
35 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- HARTMAN STUART J (PRESIDENT/CEO)
- DESAEGHER NORMA N (VICE PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- HARTMAN STUART J (PRESIDENT/CEO): $770,133 total reported compensation
- AMBERG ROBERT R (EXECUTIVE VP GEN COUNSEL): $530,647 total reported compensation
- ROSSELLO FRANK JR (CFO AND VP OF FINANCE): $488,122 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To provide housing options for older adults in an environment that enhances their quaility of life physically, mentally, and spiritually.
What it reported doing in 2024
At mayflower gardens, we believe in caring for the whole person: medically, physically, spiritually, and emotionally. Our community is staffed with compassionate medical professionals that provide shortterm care and recovery for patients after surgeries or suffering from longterm illnesses.mayflower gardens is a licensed, 48 bed nursing community offering 24 hour skilled nursing services and rehabilitation services.we also offer respite/short term stays where residents are encouraged to be as active and independent as they wish to be. Our many services include contracted rehabilitation (physical, occupational and speech therapy), podiatry, vision, audiology, dental, regular outings, inhouse beauty/barber shop services, and transportation
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Other-operating. 100% of the money available for current operations came from other operating 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
MIXED - 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 few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 19
- Transparency & Controls: 60
- Accountability: 77
- Sustainability: 86
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 0.1%; rating input score 0
- Program expense ratio: 55.8%; rating input score 56
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 4 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 44
- 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: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 99.9%; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 50.38; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 5,310%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -5% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 6.4% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 1% per year; rating input score 100; 14th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 0.1% of revenue deployed · 55.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 4 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $8K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $770K · 35 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 20 of 20 current checks pass
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Related organizations: 236 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 56/100.
- Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 8 not reported.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 0/100.