Painted Hills Home Care

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
883025533
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Page, AZ, USA
Phone
9284851331
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,378,471
Expenses
$1,453,165
Assets
$142,114
Liabilities
$4,696

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Lorraine Pierson (Board President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Lorraine Pierson (Board President): $77,664 total reported compensation
  • Harriet Yazzie (Recruiting Manager): $7,685 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

We believe that every person can be cared for with dignity in their own homes, including those in the indigenous and rural communities, so we teach families how to provide specialized care for their elders with honor and respect.

What it reported doing in 2025

Fee for service providing in home care to elderly and or disabled members of the Navajo Nation in the most rural underserved areas because they are hard to reach and lack basic utilities.This program also includes providing training and basic living and cleaning supplies as required by the client or caregiver providing the service.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 53
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 22
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 96.1%; rating input score 96
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 1st 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: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: -5.4%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.1; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.9%; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.2% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.1% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.9% per year; rating input score 100; 31st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 96.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 6 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $78K · 6 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $16K reported
  • Consistency: 20 of 24 current checks pass · 4 findings to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2023 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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.
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 19/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 6/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: CEO compensation review process not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX DepreciationDepletion column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D other liabilities reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 48/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 48/100.