Nazareth Inn
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 720834462
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2010–2017
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2017
- Location
- New Orleans, LA, USA
- Phone
- 5045963460
- Rating
- 41
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Senior Citizens' Housing/Retirement Communities
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $58,271
- Expenses
- $30,453
- Assets
- $43,963
- Liabilities
- $145,654
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
4 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- MOST REV GREGORY AYMOND DD (President)
- MOST REV FERNAND J CHERIIII (Vice President)
People named in this filing
- MOST REV GREGORY AYMOND DD (President)
- MOST REV FERNAND J CHERIIII (Vice President)
- JEFFREY J ENTWISLE (Treasurer)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To provide supportive services in the form of service coordination to the residents of nazareth i and ii
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
- Distribution model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
The verdict
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 3
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 67
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 2%; rating input score 2
- Program expense ratio: 3.9%; rating input score 4
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 47.7%; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.44; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 3.31; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -40.8% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 4.8% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 1.5% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 2% of revenue deployed · 3.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
- Consistency: 7 of 8 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 8 filing years from 2010 to 2017
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 2/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 4/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 58/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 2/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.