National Church Residences

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
310651750
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Columbus, OH, USA
Phone
(800) 211-2713
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Low-Income & Subsidized Rental Housing
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$113,395,251
Expenses
$96,542,601
Assets
$242,435,160
Liabilities
$61,451,422

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

41 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SUSAN DIMICKELE (PRESIDENT/CEO)
  • SONYA BROWN (SVP AFF. HOUSING/AHMS PRESIDENT)
  • BRIANNA METTLER (SVP SR LIVING/HC VP/AYD PRESIDENT)
  • MARK RICKETTS (FORMER PRESIDENT, CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • SUSAN DIMICKELE (PRESIDENT/CEO): $1,053,087 total reported compensation
  • MATTHEW RULE (SVP OF HOUSING DEVELOPMENT): $578,999 total reported compensation
  • BRIANNA METTLER (SVP SR LIVING/HC VP/AYD PRESIDENT): $567,562 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Rooted in Christian service and values, National Church Residences advances dignity, comfort, and independence for older adults through affordable senior housing and health care services—creating communities where seniors can thrive and families can feel peace of mind. Home > About Us > Mission & Values Living Our Mission, Vision and Values National Church Residences was founded on a Christian commitment to provide dignified housing, socialization and health care to older adults. After nearly 60 years, we continue to honor our mission creating communities where seniors and their families feel supported and valued. Our team of over 2,300 staff members across 23 states live out our mission statement daily, bringing quality care to over 70,000 seniors across 360 communities.

What it reported doing in 2024

National church residences is a not-for-profit corporation certified as a 501 (c)(3) charitable organization. In 1961, the reverend john r. Glenn and four Ohio presbyterian churches formed national church residences out of a christian commitment to serve older adults' housing, social, and human needs. National church residences has grown to become one of the largest non-profit provider of affordable housing for seniors in the nation with over 30,000 units in 25 states. National church residences operates continuing care retirement communities, nursing, assisted living, and memory care facilities as well as home health and hospice programs. Governed by volunteer board of directors comprised of a broad mix of people with professional, business, and human services backgrounds, national church residences has built a proven track record of excellence based on continuous improvement to its services and standards of care for those we serve. National church residences supports and is affiliated with several of the nation's leading senior, social service, and health care advocacy organizations, including leadingage, the national affordable housing management association (nahma), and leadingage Ohio. National church residences is recognized as a national leader in integrating homes and supportive services for seniors and vulnerable individuals. As a respected member of the not-for-profit community, national church residences is vitally interested in contributing to the formation of public policy issues affecting those we serve. Our growth is attributable to the successful public and private partnerships required to develop needed housing communities and establish meaningful service programs for residents in the communities we serve. Our vision is to continually improve society by transforming the way seniors and populations live and thrive.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 89% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 98% 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 - 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 fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 56
  • Transparency & Controls: 91
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 67
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 54.9%; rating input score 55
  • Program expense ratio: 65.9%; rating input score 66
  • Fundraising efficiency: $6.67 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 98.7%; rating input score 99; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • 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; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 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: 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: 14.9%; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.51; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.25; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8.1%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.5% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.1% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.4% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 2 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 54.9% of revenue deployed · 65.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 18 of 18 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $63.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1.1M · 41 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $2.6M reported
  • Consistency: 37 of 39 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 39 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 307 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 55/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 30/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.