Saint Elizabeth Home East Greenwich

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
050258998
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
East Greenwich, RI, USA
Phone
4017737400
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$26,305,411
Expenses
$26,527,931
Assets
$17,623,522
Liabilities
$16,748,127

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

Leadership & pay

21 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MATTHEW R TRIMBLE (PRESIDENT & CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • MATTHEW R TRIMBLE (PRESIDENT & CEO): $336,106 total reported compensation
  • MARK LOISELLE (CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $237,344 total reported compensation
  • LAMINE NIANG (L.P.N): $217,821 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 organization provides nursing and rehabilitation services for 162 men and women including a 40-bed special care unit for individuals with alzheimer's disease and related dementias. Short-term transitional care provides individuals with the specialized therapy and rehabilitation needed to return home after hospitalizations.

What it reported doing in 2024

Saint elizabeth home, east greenwich provides 24 hour nursing care in house and makes no disbursements other than to individuals and suppliers for care to residents of the home.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 87% 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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some related-organization disclosures are missing.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 84
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 25
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 90.3%; rating input score 90
  • Program expense ratio: 89.5%; rating input score 90
  • Fundraising efficiency: $9.3 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Scored; rating input score 0

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: -0.8%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.66; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.95; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.9% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.9% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.8% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 90.3% of revenue deployed · 89.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $23.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $336K · 21 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $4M reported
  • Consistency: 34 of 34 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 8 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 10 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.

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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 36/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 27/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 23/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 7/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 42/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.