Shalom Park

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
742376546
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Aurora, CO, USA
Phone
3036805000
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Supportive Housing for Older Adults

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$21,777,049
Expenses
$21,907,741
Assets
$11,723,062
Liabilities
$3,605,003

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

27 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MARC PENNER (PRESIDENT/CEO)
  • MINDY MOSKOWITZ (COO/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • MARC PENNER (PRESIDENT/CEO): $420,437 total reported compensation
  • MINDY MOSKOWITZ (COO/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $216,594 total reported compensation
  • THEOPHILUS O FRIMPONG (DIRECTOR OF NURSING): $192,617 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Creating a joyful community where honor and belonging flourish. Shalom park, an eden alternative milestone ii organization, operates a nursing home for the aged. It provides health care and other related (continued on schedule o)services to residents through the operation of a multi-level skilled nursing facility.

What it reported doing in 2025

Shalom park operates a nursing home. During 2025, the organization provided care for 188 elders.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 91% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 94% 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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 88
  • Accountability: 92
  • Sustainability: 23
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 89.7%; rating input score 90
  • Program expense ratio: 89.9%; rating input score 90
  • Fundraising efficiency: $8.36 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 94.7%; rating input score 95; 24th 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: -0.6%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.54; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.31; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.9%; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.9% per year; rating input score 100; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.3% per year; rating input score 100; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -5.5% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 89.7% of revenue deployed · 89.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 18 of 19 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $19.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $420K · 27 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $3.1M reported
  • Consistency: 38 of 38 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 9 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 4 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 28/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 19/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 13/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 40/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 43/100.