Mennonite Home Communities of Ohio
Legal name: Mennonite Memorial Home
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 344455701
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Bluffton, OH, United States
- Phone
- 4193581015
- Rating
- 78
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Nursing, Convalescent Facilities
- Affiliation
- Christianity
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $13,032,606
- Expenses
- $14,065,057
- Assets
- $16,267,425
- Liabilities
- $12,006,345
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
20 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JOHN WARNER (CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- JOHN WARNER (CEO): $281,558 total reported compensation
- DAREN LEE (COO): $132,531 total reported compensation
- DEBRA WILT (DIRECTOR OF NURSING): $109,927 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
As a nonprofit retirement community, Mennonite Home Communities of Ohio (MHCO) provides compassionate care and support to elders through independent living, assisted living, long-term care/skilled nursing, memory care, and short-term rehab—serving the current needs of elders in their community and their future needs.
What it reported doing in 2024
The mennonite home communities of Ohio, which is a licenced home for the aging in the state of Ohio, operates the three campuses. 1. The mennonite memorial home campus consists of 60 certified nursing home beds, a license to serve 40 assisted living residents (19 units in service), and 17 independent/duplex units. 2. The maple crest campus includes a license to serve 30 assisted living residents (20 units in service), 32 independent/duplex units, and 34 independent living apartments.3. The willow ridge campus is compose of two home that consists of 10 certified nursing home beds each, for a total of 20 residents.the organization provided 26,857 inpatient days of care in 2024 in its nursing care facilities.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 97% 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. Expenses are high relative to revenue and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 87
- Transparency & Controls: 66
- Accountability: 91
- Sustainability: 29
- Growth: 80
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 99.8%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 92.5%; rating input score 93
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 10th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Missing
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: No; rating input score 0
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th 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: -7.9%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.16; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.74; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 1.2%; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 2.3% per year; rating input score 100; 21st percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 1.7% per year; rating input score 100; 16th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -1% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 3 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 99.8% of revenue deployed · 92.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $13M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $282K · 20 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.6M reported
- Consistency: 30 of 31 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
- 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.
Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 12/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 41/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 16/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.