Rebecca Residence Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
412127319
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Allison Park, PA, USA
Phone
7244440600
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Reported finances

Revenue
$559,009
Expenses
$648,414
Assets
$13,327,618
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Phil Ricci-See Schedule O (Board Member): $172,537 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The Foundation was formed to support the operations of Rebecca Residence, a facility offering skilled nursing, personal care, independent living, and rehab/therapy services, located in Allison Park, PA.

What it reported doing in 2024

Rebecca Residence Foundation (The Foundation) distributed $542,411 during the period from July 1, 2024 to June 30, 2025 in support of the operation of Rebecca Residence. Per the Funding and Indemnification Agreement between Rebecca Residence Foundation and Concordia Lutheran Health and Human Care (the sole member for Rebecca Residence), 50% of the funds disbursed to Rebecca Residence are to be designated for use at Rebecca Residence by the Foundation Board of Directors. This included $161,975 in resident subsidies, $40,000 for activities, $54,018 for landscaping at the facility, $5,225 for employee appreciation, $3,000 resident Christmas party, and $13,975 to various additonal programs. The other 50% of the funds disbursed are to be used at the discretion of Rebecca Residence.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 68
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 52
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 83.7%; rating input score 84
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 90%; rating input score 90; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Limited
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -16%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 20.55; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.7%; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.3% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1% per year; rating input score 100; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.6% per year; rating input score 100; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 83.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 10 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $542K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $173K · 11 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 14 of 14 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 2 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 12/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 59/100.