Presbyterian Villages of Michigan
Legal name: Presbyterian Villages of Michigan Foundation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 202559884
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2020–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Southfield, MI, US
- Rating
- 76
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Senior Centers
- Affiliation
- Christianity
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $4,492,783
- Expenses
- $6,847,722
- Assets
- $22,996,303
- Liabilities
- $363,205
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
22 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Roger Myers (Ex-Officio CEO of PVM)
- Paul Miller (President President of Presbyterian Villages of Micigan Foundation)
Highest reported compensation
- Roger Myers (Ex-Officio CEO of PVM): $449,285 total reported compensation
- Bruce Blalock (Treasurer): $264,847 total reported compensation
- Paul Miller (President President of Presbyterian Villages of Micigan Foundation): $183,594 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Guided by our Christian heritage, we serve all seniors creating new possibilities for quality living. PVM is proud to present Michigan seniors with a full spectrum of residential and care options including apartments (affordable and income-qualified), condominiums, cottages, assisted living, Alzheimer’s/memory support services, rehabilitation (Transitional Care Units), skilled nursing care, Green Houses®, as well as essential services like the Program of All-Inclusive Care for the Elderly (PACE Southeast Michigan and PACE Central Michigan)® and more. PVM is committed to achieving and sustaining excellence in all that we do. We invite you to take a look around our website and embrace all the possibilities of what life at PVM has to offer for you or your loved one.
What it reported doing in 2024
A non-profit faith based philanthropic organization that receives charitable contributions, manages its funds and provides financial assistance to related organizations and others who focus on serving senior adults
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 66% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - 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 filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 84
- Transparency & Controls: 72
- Accountability: 79
- Sustainability: 41
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 82.8%; rating input score 83
- Fundraising efficiency: $3.05 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Pass
- 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: 76.9%; rating input score 77; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 95%; rating input score 95; 25th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 56
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- 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: -52.4%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.36; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 2.7%; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 30.5% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -9.7% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 3.1% per year; rating input score 100; 24th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 82.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 19 of 20 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $5.7M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $449K · 22 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 30 of 31 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 4 filing years from 2020 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 27 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 74 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: Fundraising efficiency scored 9/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 9 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.