O'Connor Woods

Legal name: O'connor Woods Housing Corporation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
680201024
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Stockton, CA, US
Phone
866-375-2866
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Supportive Housing for Older Adults

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$37,838,530
Expenses
$39,489,902
Assets
$75,366,404
Liabilities
$60,232,334

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

Leadership & pay

19 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • PENNY MALLETTE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • PENNY MALLETTE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $243,327 total reported compensation
  • TAMMY NGUYEN - COORDINATOR (OF RESIDENT ASSESSMENT): $180,736 total reported compensation
  • MICHELLE SMITH (SNF ADMINISTRATOR): $178,133 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

O'Connor Woods is a life plan community that provides a continuum of care for seniors, promoting independence, dignity, and quality of life.

What it reported doing in 2024

Assisted living - licensed by the state of California as a residential care facility for the elderly, the assisted living facilities provide 24 hour care and supervision in a residential environment.memory care - licensed by the state of California as a residential care facility for the elderly to provide 24 hour memory support services for those who have age-related dementia or alzheimer's diseases; a-day-away - licensed by the state of California to provide a safe, engaging place for loved ones for a few hours or even a full day.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 97% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 72
  • Accountability: 86
  • Sustainability: 36
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 91.9%; rating input score 92
  • Program expense ratio: 85.6%; rating input score 86
  • Fundraising efficiency: $1 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 22nd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd 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; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -4.4%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.91; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.8; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3%; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.8% per year; rating input score 100; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.9% per year; rating input score 100; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.3% per year; rating input score 100; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 6 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 91.9% of revenue deployed · 85.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $33.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $243K · 19 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $6.3M reported
  • Consistency: 40 of 41 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 7 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 2/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 18/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 14/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.