Pleasant View Home

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
480581963
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Inman, KS, USA
Phone
6205856411
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Nursing, Convalescent Facilities

Reported finances

Revenue
$11,646,592
Expenses
$12,823,911
Assets
$9,301,804
Liabilities
$8,915,776

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KEVIN R REIMER (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • KEVIN R REIMER (CEO): $145,099 total reported compensation
  • TOD B RITCHA (CFO END 07/24): $85,161 total reported compensation
  • RANDY S VALENTINE (CFO BEG 08/24): $43,095 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

It is the mission of pleasant view home to provide a safe, comfortable, christian environment where individuals may recover as well as live life to the fullest.

What it reported doing in 2024

Pleasant view homes skilled nursing facilities provided nursing care and skilled rehabilitation services to individuals at a 122 bed nursing home in inman, ks and a 12 bed home plus just north of hutchinson, ks. Additionally, pleasant view provided outpatient therapy services allowing area residents to receive this treatment without having to travel out of the community for care. The nursing home prepared food for meals on wheels for the inman community. The nursing home provides several intergenerational programs for the inman community. The inman facility has been an educational sight for individuals enrolled in cna, cma , emt, and nursing programs. Additionally, pleasant view home has been a mentoring facility that is used to train other nursing home personnel about person centered care.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 99% of the money available for current operations came from other operating 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some related-organization disclosures are missing.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 85
  • Transparency & Controls: 85
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 22
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 97.7%; rating input score 98
  • Program expense ratio: 88.6%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: $1.92 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: No; rating input score 0

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • 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: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -10.1%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.73; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.96; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.1%; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.2% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.7% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1.6% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 97.7% of revenue deployed · 88.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $11.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $145K · 12 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $2.6M reported
  • Consistency: 36 of 37 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes related organizations
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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.

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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 6/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 10/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 26/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 7/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.