Painesville Area Senior Citizens Center

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237357905
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2020
Forms available
Form 990 2020
Location
Painesville, OH, USA
Phone
4403528095
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$178,723
Expenses
$86,543
Assets
$1,016,245
Liabilities
$82,316

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • TROY HAGER (PRESIDENT)
  • CAROL FLECK (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • DENISE POWELL (DIRECTOR): $57,037 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To provide Lake County Seniors with programs and activities that enhance the quality of their lives.

What it reported doing in 2020

Provided the following instructional programs to seniors piano lessons, aerobics, tai chi, yoga, and line dancing. Provided education on health and wellness about blood pressure, strokes, dietary, and general wellness provided hearing screening, vision screening, and cardiovascular screening. Providing education on medicare, va benefits, investments, healthcare, safety, pain management, immunology, genealogy, sr. Independence, incontinence, diabeties, podiatric care and drug repository. Providing various travel and entertainment activities in the local community and out of state. Providing facilities and equipment to seniors such as a fitness room, bowling machine, and a wii gaming system.

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 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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 70
  • Transparency & Controls: 83
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 74
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 66.2%; rating input score 66
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 51.6%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 11.74; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.08; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 65.9%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -9.8% per year; rating input score 0; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.7% per year; rating input score 0; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.2% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 66.2% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $87K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $57K · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 22 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2011 to 2020
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 2/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 37/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.