Renaissance Adult Day Services Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
363922836
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2018
Forms available
Form 990 2018
Location
Chicago, IL, USA
Rating
61
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Adult Day Care

Reported finances

Revenue
$753,077
Expenses
$768,704
Assets
$559,697
Liabilities
$574,497

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Carolyn Hicks (President)
  • Angela Skinner (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Melvin E Hayes (CFOTreasurerProgram Adminis)
  • Carolyn Hicks (President)
  • Dr Gessel Berry (Advisory Board)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Adult Day Care formed to administer a program, which enriches and improves the quality of life and helps fulfill the needs of individuals challenged by advanced age and/or disabilitiesby allowing them to achieve and maintain their maximum level of independent.

What it reported doing in 2018

In-Home Care Program-Provided personal care, housekeeping, shopping and laundry services. RADS also provides meal preparation, medication reminders, companionship services, and escort service for clients to and from appointment.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 70% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue has grown recently. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 56
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 41
  • Sustainability: 35
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 63.3%; rating input score 63
  • Program expense ratio: 61.6%; rating input score 62
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 30%; rating input score 30; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -2.1%; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.73; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.03; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -3.1% per year; rating input score 0; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.1% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.9% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 63.3% of revenue deployed · 61.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 10 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $473K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 23 current checks pass · 3 findings to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2010 to 2018
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 30/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 30/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D expense reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D revenue reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 36/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 6/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.