Premierlife
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 203587205
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
- Location
- Lees Summit, MO, USA
- Phone
- 8163472859
- Rating
- 58
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Fund Raising and Fund Distribution
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $445,284
- Expenses
- $5,164
- Assets
- $3,672,686
- Liabilities
- $381,711
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
16 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- DANIEL REXROTH (PRESIDENT AND CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- DANIEL REXROTH (PRESIDENT AND CEO): $1,127,465 total reported compensation
- RICHARD KIM KLOCKENGA (VP OF FINANCE & TREASURER): $622,797 total reported compensation
- STEVE SEGGERMAN (ASSISTANT TREASURER): $174,349 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To promote the growth and strength of its family of companies in order to continually enrich the quality of life of older adults we will accomplish this by: protecting the assets of john knox village and other entities that are part of the premierlife network, strengthening the financial base and building the assets of the network, strategically expanding geographic options and recruiting and retaining high quality staff.
What it reported doing in 2024
Support or benefit and carry out some or all the purposes of john knox village, the john knox village foundation and such other 501(c)(3)organizations as shall affiliate with premierlife and become part of the network of which premierlife is a part to be known as the "premierlife system."
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Investment-supported. 91% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
- 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
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 33
- Transparency & Controls: 67
- Accountability: 91
- Sustainability: 80
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 0.1%; rating input score 0
- Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: Yes; rating input score 100
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 98.8%; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 711.21; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.1; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 2,432.4%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 26.1% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -4.8% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 8.6% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 0.1% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $5K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $1.1M · 16 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 16 of 16 current checks pass
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay and related organizations
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Related organizations: 6 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.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 26/100.