Nccnhr Dba the National Consumer Voice for Quality Long-term Care
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 521122531
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2013–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Washington, DC, USA
- Phone
- 2023322275
- Rating
- 91
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Nursing, Convalescent Facilities
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,426,051
- Expenses
- $1,590,291
- Assets
- $1,030,126
- Liabilities
- $44,800
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
16 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- ALISON HIRSCHEL (PAST PRESIDENT)
- ELIZABETH HALIFAXPHD (PRESIDENT)
- KELLY BAGBY (VICE PRESIDENT)
- LORI SMETANKA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- LORI SMETANKA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $142,734 total reported compensation
- AMITY OVERALL-LAIB (DIR OF NTIONAL OMBUDSMAN CTR): $107,316 total reported compensation
- SAM BROOKS (DIR OF PUBLIC POLICY): $101,074 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The purpose of nccnhr is to improve long-term care system and quality of life for consumers of long-term care; to provide resources and information to members and the general public; to develop and implement training; and to study and report on long-term issues.
What it reported doing in 2025
Public policy-since its founding in 1975, nccnhr has been a key contributor to virtually every important improvement in nursing-home care policy and practice, notably the first comprehensive federal standards for quality care and residents' rights contained in the 1987 nursing home reform act. Nccnhr also addresses assisted living and community based long-term care policy. Nccnhr ensures the consumer interest is represented as policy is considered in congress, federal agencies, and courts as well as state government, and that the media are informed as well as appropriate.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- 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
STRONG - 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: 95
- Transparency & Controls: 94
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 22
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 93.1%; rating input score 93
- Fundraising efficiency: $40.97 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- 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: -11.5%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.65; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 22.1%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 3.4% per year; rating input score 100; 29th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 2.4% per year; rating input score 100; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 13.9% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 93.1% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments · $1.5M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $143K · 16 people listed
- Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 13 filing years from 2013 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
- 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.
- 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 12/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Whistleblower policy not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 31/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 14/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 45/100.