Ohio Living
Legal name: Ohio Living Communities
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 344429863
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2022
- Location
- Westerville, Ohio, US
- Phone
- 800.686.7800
- Rating
- 69
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Supportive Housing for Older Adults
- Affiliation
- Christianity
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $148,215,031
- Expenses
- $144,555,593
- Assets
- $386,022,114
- Liabilities
- $350,898,346
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
17 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- LAURENCE C GUMINA (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)
Highest reported compensation
- LAURENCE C GUMINA (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $717,013 total reported compensation
- ROBERT B STILLMAN (CFO/TREASURER): $486,720 total reported compensation
- DAVID DE SIMONE (CHIEF COUNSEL & COMPLIANCE): $393,061 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
We consistently exceed the needs and expectations of those we serve. We're proud of our reputation for excellence, and are committed to promoting quality of life and wellness of body, mind and spirit.
What it reported doing in 2024
See schedule oin fiscal year 2025, Ohio living communities operated eleven communities for seniors throughout Ohio. Services offered to residents include independent living (apartments, ranch/villa homes), assisted living (including memory care), skilled nursing (including rehabilitation services and memory care). During fiscal year ended june 30, 2025 the Ohio living communities' average occupancy in each level of care was as follows: units average occupancy available occupancy percent ----------- ----------- ----------- independent 1,601 1,491 93.1%assisted living 442 406 93.0%skilled nursing 474 425 83.4%total 2,517 2,322 91.2%the payor mix for skilled nursing for fiscal year 2025 was as follows: private pay 33% medicaid 29%medicare 19%managed care 19%total 100%
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.
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 program spending has declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 77
- Transparency & Controls: 64
- Accountability: 81
- Sustainability: 54
- Growth: 0
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 85.6%; rating input score 86
- Program expense ratio: 88.1%; rating input score 88
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 12th 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; 19th 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: 2.5%; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.67; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.91; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0.2%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -1.6% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -0.6% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -0.2% per year; rating input score 0; 7th 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: 85.6% of revenue deployed · 88.1% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 4 of 6 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $127.3M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $717K · 17 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $9.1M reported
- Consistency: 32 of 33 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 13 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Related organizations: 10 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.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 45/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 12/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.