Shoreview Senior Residence Dba Scandia Shores

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
411812410
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Richfield, MN, USA
Phone
6128612799
Rating
64
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Senior Citizens' Housing/Retirement Communities

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,731,825
Expenses
$1,709,701
Assets
$4,026,205
Liabilities
$4,474,064

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DENYSE ETHRIDGE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR & COO)
  • JON FLETCHER (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • DENYSE ETHRIDGE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR & COO): $176,347 total reported compensation
  • CHRIS SCHMIDT (VP FINANCE): $163,081 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Care for the elderly

What it reported doing in 2024

Shoreview senior residence provides housing with services to persons age 55 and older. Services that are provided free of charge include an activities program, a fitness program, transportation to medical appointments, outings and shopping, a pastoral nurse, staffing 24/7 and chaplaincy. Services that are available in independent living at an additional cost include meals, beauty/barber shop, a guest suite, and underground heated parking. There are also two laundry rooms on each floor.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 86% 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

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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 61
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 86
  • Sustainability: 47
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 67.8%; rating input score 68
  • Program expense ratio: 69%; rating input score 69
  • 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 1.3%; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.35; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.11; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.6%; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.7% per year; rating input score 100; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -3% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 67.8% of revenue deployed · 69% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $176K · 7 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $555K reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 8 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.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 40/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 5/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 59/100.