RoseVilla

Legal name: Rose Villa Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
930471873
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Portland, OR, US
Phone
503-654-3171
Rating
86
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Supportive Housing for Older Adults

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$26,535,537
Expenses
$28,856,142
Assets
$164,767,935
Liabilities
$185,059,116

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

Leadership & pay

19 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • GLEN LEWIS (CEO)
  • WADE CLOWES (PRESIDENT)
  • ELEANORE HUNTER PHD (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • GLEN LEWIS (CEO): $231,805 total reported compensation
  • JAMES WILLEFORD (DIRECTOR OF STRATEGIC OPERATIONS): $192,384 total reported compensation
  • ERIN CORNELL (DIRECTOR OF HEALTH SERVICES): $189,230 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 provide a vibrant, inclusive continuing care retirement community that empowers residents to age in place with dignity, fostering a culture of curiosity, respect, and acceptance.

What it reported doing in 2024

Clinic and in-home services provided to approximately 45 residents.intergenerational day care services, including regular intergenerational programming with residents, provided to 15 families.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 94% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 87
  • Transparency & Controls: 83
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 37
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 93.4%; rating input score 93
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: -8.7%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.71; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.12; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.1%; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 13% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.9% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 5 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 93.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $26.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $232K · 19 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.8M reported
  • Consistency: 37 of 37 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 10 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 3 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 11/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 4/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 50/100.