Michigan Masonic Home

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237259307
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-T 2022
Location
Alma, MI, USA
Phone
(800) 321-9357
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Supportive Housing for Older Adults

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$34,750,988
Expenses
$31,800,227
Assets
$62,774,490
Liabilities
$24,631,203

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

Leadership & pay

21 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Bruce Caswell (President)
  • Tamela J Rusch-D'Aguanno (Vice President)
  • Robin Whitmore (CEO)
  • Kari Conn (Executive Director)
  • Michael Logan (Former CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • Prakash Sarvepalli (Medical Director): $277,115 total reported compensation
  • Robin Whitmore (CEO): $219,808 total reported compensation
  • Kari Conn (Executive Director): $137,886 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

We Enhance Lives

What it reported doing in 2025

Michigan Masonic Home received the following grants in FY 2025: Resident Lifts/Transfer Equipment - Ashlar Lodge #91 Detroit for $5,000 Memory Care Intergenerational Activities - Alzheimer's Foundation of America for $6,000 EMMA Capnographs - Appeal Answers to Michigan Masonic Charitable Foundation for $2,500 LED Lighting Project - Consumers Energy for $815,460.50 EVAC Chair (Stair Chair) - District 1 Regional Medical Response Coalition for $4,588 INTERACT Quality of Care Staff Training - MDHHS - Civil Monetary Penalty Fund Reinvestment Program for $1,138 M&N Roof Replacement - Consumers Energy Rebate for $2,380

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 69% 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. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 64
  • Transparency & Controls: 77
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 53
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 70.2%; rating input score 70
  • Program expense ratio: 76.3%; rating input score 76
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • 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: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 8.5%; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.97; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.39; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.5%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.8% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.2% per year; rating input score 100; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.4% per year; rating input score 100; 22nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 4 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 70.2% of revenue deployed · 76.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $24.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $277K · 21 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $4.6M reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 34 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 7 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 3 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.
  • 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.

  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 54/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 52/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 33/100.