Meals on Wheels Programs and Services of Rockland Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 132831197
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2011–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Nanuet, NY, USA
- Phone
- 8456246325
- Rating
- 81
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Human Services
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $4,007,282
- Expenses
- $4,486,545
- Assets
- $3,128,329
- Liabilities
- $690,321
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
28 people listed
Highest reported compensation
- KEVIN HARDY (EXECUTIVE DIREC): $163,200 total reported compensation
- MARION ELKINS (DIRECTOR OF FIN): $92,227 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Meals on Wheels Programs and Services of Rockland, Inc. (the Organization) was formed under the Not-For-Profit Corporation Law of New York as Meals on Wheels of Rockland County, Inc. Its mission is to provide a wide range of services and programs to homebound and senior citizens of Rockland County, New York.
What it reported doing in 2024
Rockland Senior Centers ProgramThe organization operates multipurpose Senior Centers strategically located across Rockland open five days a week to residents 60 and older. The Centers offer a variety of support services including transportation, recreation, health screening, advocacy, information and referral and a hot meal. Participants contribute toward the costs of the meals. In January 2024, we reopened a senior activity center in Orangetown. In October 2024, we reopened our fifth senior activity center. The fifth center was opened in Haverstraw. During 2024, the programs provided 27,421 days of service to seniors at five centers.
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.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 78
- Transparency & Controls: 79
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 24
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 85.8%; rating input score 86
- Program expense ratio: 76.5%; rating input score 77
- Fundraising efficiency: $11.58 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: Pass
- Written employment contract: Pass
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Missing
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- 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: -12%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.7; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.22; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 5.7%; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 1.9% per year; rating input score 100; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 1.5% per year; rating input score 100; 18th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 1.5% per year; rating input score 100; 17th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 85.8% of revenue deployed · 76.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 26 of 26 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $3.4M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $163K · 28 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $850K reported
- Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
- 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.
Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 42/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 11/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 26/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 42/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 49/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.