Ps Atlanta Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
582143503
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2014
Forms available
Form 990 2014
Location
Atlanta, GA, USA
Phone
4042336500
Rating
56
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Low-Income & Subsidized Rental Housing

Reported finances

Revenue
$22,579,223
Expenses
$4,880,166
Assets
$96,553
Liabilities
$120,953

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • GREGORY K GROVE (PRESIDENT)
  • WILLIAM F ROWE III (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • GREGORY K GROVE (PRESIDENT): $3,582,816 total reported compensation
  • WILLIAM F ROWE III (VICE PRESIDENT): $175,732 total reported compensation
  • TIMOTHY A DUGGAN (DIRECTOR): $26,500 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The charitable mission is to provide assisted living care to the elderly.

What it reported doing in 2014

Ps atlanta, inc. Is a nonprofit corporation created under the nonprofit corporation laws of the state of Georgia. They own and operate plantation south of duluth, a 62-bed assisted living facility located in duluth, ga., and plantation south of dunwoody, a 40-bed assisted living facility located in dunwoody, ga.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 69% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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: 45
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 72
  • Sustainability: 47
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 29.4%; rating input score 29
  • Program expense ratio: 86.9%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 12th 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: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 78.4%; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.02; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.25; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 59.7%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -8.9% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 137.9% per year; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -188.2% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 29.4% of revenue deployed · 86.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 3 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $4.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $3.6M · 4 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $355K reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2013 to 2014
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 29/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 4/100.