National Church Residences of Savannah Ga Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
463804873
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2015
Forms available
Form 990 2015
Location
Savannah, GA, USA
Phone
6144512151
Rating
57
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Christianity
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,532,411
Expenses
$364,709
Assets
$1,876,992
Liabilities
$800,465

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • STEVEN T BODKIN (PRESIDENT)
  • STEVEN A VAN CAMP (VICE PRESIDENT (THROUGH JULY 2015))
  • TANYA KIM HAHN (VICE PRESIDENT/TREASURER (BEGIN NOV))

Highest reported compensation

  • STEVEN T BODKIN (PRESIDENT): $343,100 total reported compensation
  • MICHELLE H NORRIS (DIRECTOR): $323,604 total reported compensation
  • JULIE A FRATIANNE (SECRETARY): $256,283 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of national church residences is to provide quality housing and care at affordable prices in communities of caring persons. Our ministry is national in scope and originates from a christian commitment of service to older adults, which began in 1961. While our ministry has been targeted primarily toward older adults, we have special concern for low- and moderate-income seniors, persons with disabilities, and low- and moderate-income families. We are committed to expanding and funding services in assisted living, nursing homes, and full-service retirement communities. We also plan for thoughtful growth in affordable family housing. We are committed to professionalism in the management of property, programs, and human resources and equally committed to compassion for the people we serve.

What it reported doing in 2015

The sole purpose is to provide subsidized low and moderate-income apartment rental housing for primarily elderly persons though the u.s. Department of hud sections 202 and 8 programs.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 79% 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: 39
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 72
  • Sustainability: 75
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 20.2%; rating input score 20
  • Program expense ratio: 84.9%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 19th 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: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 12th 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: 76.2%; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.15; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.43; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 23%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.2% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 148.2% per year; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2.8% per year; rating input score 0; 22nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 20.2% of revenue deployed · 84.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 3 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $310K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $343K · 7 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 28 of 29 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2014 to 2015
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 113 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 20/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 9/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 24/100.